JCSIT| journal of computational science and intelligent technologies| Mnaa| Mnaa Publications| Mnaapub| Mnaa Pub|J Comput Sci Intell Technol|ISSN: 2582-9041|2582-9041
JCSIT| journal of computational science and intelligent technologies| Mnaa| Mnaa Publications| Mnaapub| Mnaa Pub

Submission to first decision: 45 days

Submission to acceptance: 90 days

latest news

Research and review articles are invited for upcoming issues.
read more ...

Special issue proposals are invited.
read more ...

Publication Ethics

Ethical standards and publishing responsibilities

To maintain fair practice, we at Journal of Computational Science and Intelligent Technologies (JCSIT) strongly believe in following these guidelines. We are committed to fair practice of publication. Success in this regard can be achieved if ethics and publishing responsibilities are well practiced by following participants.

Responsibilities

It is the responsibility of the Author to:

  • Confirm that the submitted manuscript is not under consideration or accepted for publication elsewhere.
  • Maintain accurate records of data associated with their manuscript, and to supply or provide access to these data should this be requested. If appropriate and allowed by an employer or funding body, to deposit data in a suitable storage location for sharing and further use by others.
  • Where portions of the content overlap with published or submitted content, to acknowledge and cite the original source.
  • Confirm that all work in the submitted manuscript is original, and to acknowledge and cite content reproduced from other sources.
  • Obtain permission to reproduce any content from other sources.
  • Declare any potential conflicts of interest (i.e. where the author has a competing interest that could be viewed as exerting an undue influence on his / her duties at any stage during the publication process).
  • Notify the Editor or publisher if a significant error in their publication is identified, and then to cooperate with the publisher to publish an erratum, or addendum, or to retract the paper, where this is thought necessary.

It is the responsibility of the Editor to:

  • Act in an objective and fair way while carrying out their duties, and not discriminate on grounds of the gender, religion, sexual orientation, political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors;
  • Follow clear and defined procedures in the event of complaints of an ethical or conflict nature, in accordance with policies and procedures of the community where appropriate. Authors should be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to complaints. All complaints should be investigated, and documentation related to any such complaints must be retained.
  • Handle submissions for sponsored supplements or special issues in the same way as other submissions, so that articles are considered and accepted solely on their academic merit and without commercial influence.

It is the responsibility of the Reviewer to:

  • Assist in the decision-making process.
  • Assist in improving the quality of the published paper by reviewing the manuscript objectively, and in a timely manner.
  • Act in a confidential manner to information supplied by an Editor or Author.
  • Inform the Editor to any content that is substantially like that under review.
  • Be aware of potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, or collaborative between the reviewer and author), and to alert the Editor to these.

Unethical Behaviour

Identification of unethical behaviour

  • Misconduct and unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to the attention of the Editor and publisher at any time, by anyone.
  • Whoever informs the Editor or publisher of such misconduct should provide sufficient information in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.

Investigation

  • An initial decision should be taken by the Editor, who if appropriate should consult with or seek advice from the publisher.
  • Evidence should be attained, while avoiding spreading any allegations beyond those who need to know.

Minor cases

  • Minor misconduct is dealt with without the need to consult more widely. In any event, the author should be given the opportunity to respond to any allegations.

Serious cases

  • Serious misconduct requires that the employers of the accused be notified. The Editor, in consultation with the publisher, should make the decision whether or not to involve the employers, either by examining the available evidence themselves or by further consultation with a limited number of experts.

Action on outcome

  • Inform and educate the author or reviewer in case there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of normal standards.
  • Issuing a show cause letter to the author or reviewer covering the misconduct, which should act as a warning on future behaviour.
  • Publish a notice detailing the misconduct.
  • Issuing a show cause letter to the head of the author's or reviewer's department or funding agency.
  • Formal retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the journal, or book series, together with informing the head of the author or reviewer's department, the relevant Abstracting & Indexing agencies and the readers of the publication.
  • Impose an embargo on contributions from an individual for a defined period.
  • Report the case and outcome to a relevant organisation or higher authority for further investigation and action.

*Contents on this page was referred from COPE guidelines