Electronic Journal of Mathematics (ISSN: 2789-5734)

 

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

 

 

This journal adheres to the

The editors, reviewers, and authors of the journal are assumed to adhere to the guidelines on ethical behavior outlined in the above-mentioned sources. Some of the essential points in relation to the aforementioned guidelines are listed below.

 

1. For Authors

1.1. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author of the manuscript to make sure that every appropriate co-author, and no inappropriate co-author, is listed in the manuscript’s authors list. The corresponding author should also ensure that all co-authors have reviewed the final version of the manuscript and given their approval, and that all co-authors have given their consent for the manuscript to be submitted for publication.

1.2. The authors should not use previously published figure(s) or/and other copyrighted material without having written permission from the concerned journal or publisher, and they should provide appropriate credit when reusing any copyrighted material.

1.3. Submitting a manuscript to multiple journals at once is an unethical publishing practice and is not permissible. A researcher shouldn’t submit articles to multiple journals that substantially provide the same or related results. When an article is submitted to a journal, it is assumed that it has not already been published or is not presently being considered for publication elsewhere, and if it is accepted for publication, it will not be published elsewhere.

1.4. If a retracted publication is cited in a manuscript, then the reasons for doing so should be explained in the text of the manuscript, and the article’s retracted status should be indicated in the references list of the manuscript. If an erroneous article, whose corrections are accessible in another document, is cited in the manuscript, then the document containing such corrections should also be cited.

1.5. Before submitting manuscripts, the authors must make sure that their manuscripts are completely original, and if they have utilized someone else’s works, they must properly cite or quote them. All the publications that had an impact on the submitted manuscript must have been cited properly.

1.6. It is unacceptable and unethical to make fraudulent or intentionally erroneous statements. If a manuscript contains plagiarized or misleading material, the authors should refrain from submitting it for publication. When any author of a published article becomes aware of a serious mistake or inaccuracy in the article, it is his/her responsibility to promptly contact the journal’s publisher/editor and cooperate with the journal’s publisher/editor to correct or retract the article.

1.7. The authors should limit their references to related literature and avoid self-citation wherever possible.

1.8. Any financial or other significant conflicts of interest that may be considered to have an impact on the findings or interpretations of the paper must be disclosed by the author(s) in the submitted paper. The funding sources that supported the submitted work should be acknowledged in the manuscript.

 

2. For Editors

2.1. Regardless of the authors’ ethnicity, citizenship, race, religious beliefs, gender, or political orientation, editorial decisions on manuscripts are solely based on their content’s significance, clarity, novelty, correctness, presentation, and writing, as well as their relevance to the scope of the journal.

2.2. Editors are supposed to select reviewers whose experience most closely resembles the subject matter of the submission and ask them to evaluate the work.

2.3. The editorial staff is expected to maintain the confidentiality of the data gained from the submitted papers and to protect the identity of the reviewers. Unpublished materials described in submitted papers cannot be utilized by the editors for their own study in any way without the author’s permission in writing.

2.4. When there is clear proof of scientific misconduct, plagiarism, unethical research, or other violations of ethical scientific publishing in a published paper in this journal, the editorial office of the journal is responsible for issuing notes consisting of relevant explanations or/and apology statements, and is also expected to retract that paper.

2.5. Editors of this journal are required to refrain from advising that authors cite their papers (or their associates’ papers) just to raise citation rates and/or to boost the exposure of their papers (or their colleagues’ papers); recommendations must always be based on legitimate scholarly justifications.

2.6. Every editor of an SDP journal is expected to declare any conflicts of interest they may have with reference to the articles that they oversee.

2.7. The editor who conducts the review process of a manuscript has a significant impact on how quickly a paper is published or rejected after being received. Thus, editors are expected to avoid unnecessary delays in the review process of the manuscripts that they handle.

 

3. For Reviewers

3.1. Reviewers must agree to take part in a manuscript’s review process only if they are sufficiently knowledgeable about the manuscript’s subject to conduct an accurate evaluation.

3.2. Reviewers who have conflicts of interest related to an article should decline to take part in its review process.

3.3. Reviewers are expected to maintain the confidentiality of the data gained from the papers that they review. Unpublished materials described in the papers that reviewers review cannot be utilized by the reviewers for their own study in any way without the handling editor’s permission in writing.

3.4. Reviews must be conducted in a positive and impartial manner. It is unacceptable to criticize the author(s) personally. Reviewers should express their opinions in detail and provide evidence to back them up.

3.5. The handling editor should be informed by reviewers of any significant similarities or overlaps seen between the manuscript under review and any previously published document that they are personally aware of.

3.6. If the reviewers are aware of any published materials that are sufficiently relevant to the manuscript under review and the authors have not cited them, then they should inform the handling editor about it. However, they are also supposed to avoid recommending that authors cite their papers (or their associates’ papers) just to raise citation rates and/or to boost the exposure of their papers (or their colleagues’ papers); recommendations must always be based on legitimate scholarly justifications.