JCC Publication ethics and malpractice statement
The publication of peer-reviewed articles with regard to the following rules of “Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement” is an important model for the Journal of Composites and Compounds (JCC). All parties are expected to agree upon standards of ethical behavior involved in the act of publishing: the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the author, and the publisher.
The basis of our ethic statements is COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
"This journal follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and complies with the highest ethical standards in accordance with ethical laws".
- Publication decisions
The editor-in-chief of the JCC decides which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published. The editors of JCC editorial board use the provided guidelines and policies.
- Fair play
When an editor at any time evaluates the submitted manuscripts for their intellectual content it is regardless to gender, race, religious belief, sexual orientation, citizenship, ethnic origin, or political philosophy of the authors.
The information about a submitted manuscript must not be disclosed to anyone by the editor and any editorial staff other than the corresponding author, potential reviewers, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
- Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Editor must not use the materials disclosed in an unpublished submitted manuscript for his/her own research without the express written consent of the author.
- Duties of Reviewers
a. Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Editorial decisions can be assisted by peer review process as well as the editorial communications with the author that can assist the author to improve the paper.
In order to have a fast peer review, the selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible must excuse himself from the review process via notifying the editor.
c. Standards of Objectivity
The review process must be conducted objectively and the personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. The views of referees should be expressed clearly with supporting arguments.
d. Acknowledgment of Sources
The relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors should be identified by reviewers. Any statement that a derivation, argument or observation, had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also let the editor know if there were any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
e. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Reviewers should not use the privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review for personal advantage.
- Duties of Authors
a. Reporting standards
Authors reporting an original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The paper should contain underlying data accurately. Also the paper should contain sufficient references and detail to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are resulted from unethical behavior and are not acceptable.
b. Data Access and Retention
Authors can be asked if they can provide the raw data with regard to their submitted paper for editorial review.
c. Plagiarism and Originality
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works. In this regard, if the authors have used the words and/or work of others they should appropriately cite or quote the reference.
d. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
The authors should not generally publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is not acceptable.
e. Acknowledgment of Sources
Suitable 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.
f. Authorship of the Paper
Those who played a significant role to the conception, execution, design, or interpretation of the reported study can be in the authorship.
g. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All of the financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the manuscript results or interpretation should be disclosed by authors. Authors should also disclose the sources of financial support for the project.
h. Fundamental errors in published works
If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, he/she should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to correct or retract the paper.