The Ethical Standards of the “Journal of Applied Research in Electrical Engineering (JAREE)”
The Journal of Applied Research in Electrical Engineering (JAREE) aims to go through the procedure of getting membership of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in the future. For the time being, the JAREE follows the principles of the COPE on all aspects of publication ethics, and in particular, on how to deal with acts of misconduct thereby committing to investigate allegations of misconduct in order to ensure the integrity of research.
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
JAREE's publication decision is based on a codified process. Journal policies are a part of this process. Content compatibility of each submitted paper with the scope of the journal is one of the journal policies. Submitted papers must be free of allegations such as libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Reviewer comments are another part of the decision process. The results of these two parts determine the final decision for each paper. JAREE has been authorized to select valuable submitted papers for publication.
JAREE has a commitment to protect all information of submitted articles from untrusted ones. In this regard, JAREE’s editorial boards such as reviewers and advisers are only able to access the information.
Identification of and Dealing with Allegations of Research Misconduct
The publisher and editor of the journal take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication, among others. In no case shall the journal or its editor encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place. In the event that the journal’s publisher or editor is made aware of any allegation of research misconduct relating to a published article in the journal, the publisher or editor shall follow COPE’s guidelines in dealing with allegations.
If there is a suspicion of misconduct, the editorial board will carry out a comprehensive investigation and if the allegation seems to raise valid concerns, the accused author will be contacted and given an opportunity to explain the issue. If the misconduct is established beyond a reasonable doubt, the Editor-in-Chief may implement the following actions:
- If the article is still under consideration, it may be rejected and returned to the author.
- If the article has already been published online, either an erratum will be placed with the article, or complete retraction of the article will occur.
- The author’s institution may be informed as well.
Specifications of a Good Scientific Practice
Authors should refrain from misrepresenting research results. Maintaining the integrity of the research and its presentation can be achieved by following the rules of good scientific practice, as listed below:
- The manuscript should not be submitted to more than one journal simultaneously,
- The manuscript should not be published previously,
- A single research should not be split up into parts,
- Fabrication and manipulation of data are not acceptable,
- Proper acknowledgments to other works must be given,
- Consent to submit has been received explicitly from all co-authors, as well as from the responsible authorities of the organizations which have supported the research,
- Authors whose names appear on the submission have contributed sufficiently to the scientific work,
- Authors are to ensure the proper author list, corresponding author, and order of authors at submission,
- Authors are to be prepared to send relevant documentation or data in order to verify the validity of the research results, upon request.
Revenue Sources/Advertising/Direct Marketing
JAREE is financially supported by Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Iran, and has no other sources for earning funds. JAREE accepts No advertisements in its official website.
JAREE publishes TWO issues per year, with occasional special issues coming in addition. All the contents of the journal are available forever on JAREE's exclusive website.
Duties of Authors
Submitted papers must be approved by the author(s) to consider for refereeing in JAREE. Author(s) must thus have an active presence to design and prepare all materials of their papers. All the authors must have critically reviewed its content and have approved the authenticity of the final version of the manuscript submitted for publication. Authors are responsible for the accuracy of the manuscript content. They should also sign an agreement form confirming their contribution in writing the manuscript. Papers are only considered for publication once consent is given by all contributing authors.
Originality and Plagiarism
Author(s) must present original works for consideration in JAREE. In papers containing any part of a published article, author(s) have to properly cite or quote the source of the published article. JAREE utilizes appropriate plagiarism detection software packages for checking the originality of submitted manuscripts during different steps of the reviewing process.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
Author(s) should not submit manuscripts while they have been previously presented for refereeing to other journals. Simultaneous submission of a manuscript in more than one journal will be faced with unethical publishing behaviors.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Duties of Reviewers
Peer review process
All of the journal’s content, apart from any editorial material that is clearly marked as such, is subjected to the peer-review process. Peer review is defined as obtaining advice on individual manuscripts from expert reviewers in the fields which are not part of the journal’s editorial board. The following rules are to be considered if one gets invited by the JAREE's Editor-in-Chief to review a manuscript:
1. Reviewing manuscript critically but constructively and preparing detailed comments about the manuscript to help authors improve their work
2. Reviewing multiple versions of a manuscript as necessary
3. Providing all required information within established deadlines
4. Making recommendations to the editor regarding the suitability of the manuscript for publication in the journal
5. Declaring to the editor any potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authors or the content of a manuscript they are asked to review
6. Reporting possible research misconducts
7. Suggesting alternative reviewers in case they cannot review the manuscript for any reasons
8. Treating the manuscript as a confidential document
9. Not making any use of the work described in the manuscript
10. Not communicating directly with authors, if somehow they identify the authors
11. Not identifying themselves to authors
12. Not passing on the assigned manuscript to another reviewer
13. Ensuring that the manuscript is of high quality and original work
14. Informing the editor if he/she finds the assigned manuscript is under consideration in any other publication to his/her knowledge
15. Writing review report in fluent English only
16. Checking novelty, originality, scientific reliability, a valuable contribution to the science, ethical aspects, appropriate grammar, punctuation and spelling, appropriate citation and probable scientific misconduct in the submitted article
17. Checking the structure of the article submitted and its accordance with the authors’ guidelines
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer reviewers have an effective role in assisting the editor to make editorial decisions. They also can assist the authors to improve their papers throughout the editorial communications.
Each one of the peer reviewers who feels unqualified to review a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse him/herself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor and in accordance with the ethical standards.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.