Ethics in Scientific Publishing

In order to maintain the quality of research manuscripts and prevent publishing violations/plagiarism in the publishing process, the editorial board has established the IJID scientific publishing ethics. These publishing ethics apply to writers/authors, editors, reviewers and journal manager/editorial staff.

1.    Ethics for Authors

  1. Reporting: The author must provide information about the process and results of their research to the editorial department in an fair, clear and thorough manner, and keep their research data properly and safely.
  2. Originality and Plagiarism: The author must ensure that the manuscript sent/submitted to the editorial department is the original manuscript, written by the author themselves, and sourced from their own thoughts and ideas instead of plagiarized from the writings or ideas of others. Authors are strictly prohibited from changing any reference source quoted into someone else’s name.
  3. Redundant submissions: The author should inform that the manuscript is not sent/submitted to other journal publishers. If redundant submissions of the manuscript to other publishers are found, the editorial department will reject the manuscript sent by the author.
  4. Errors in the writing: The author should immediately inform the editorial department if any errors are found in the writing, as a result of both reviews and edits. Writing errors include errors in the writing of names, affiliations/institutions, quotations, and others that can reduce the meaning and substance of the manuscript. If this is the case, the author should promptly propose that corrections be made to the manuscript.
  5. Disclosure of conflicts of interest: The author must understand the ethics in scientific publishing as outlined above to avoid any conflict of interest with other parties so that the manuscript can be processed properly and safely. 

2.    Ethics for Editors

  1. Publishing decision: The editor must ensure a thorough, transparent, objective, fair and prudent manuscript review process. Such process provides the grounds for the editor in making a decision concerning a manuscript, whether it should  be rejected or accepted. In this case, the editorial board acts as a manuscript screening team.
  2. Publishing information: The editor must ensure that the manuscript writing guidance  for authors and other parties having interest, both the printed and electronic versions, can be accessed and read clearly.
  3. Assignment of manuscripts to peer-reviewers: The editor must determine the reviewer and the review materials, as well as inform the conditions and the review process clearly to the reviewer.
  4. Objectivity and neutrality: The editor must be objective, neutral and fair throughout the process of editing the manuscript, regardless of the author’s gender, business aspect, ethnicity, religion, race, group and citizenship.
  5. Confidentiality: The editor must keep every piece of information safe, especially the information related to the author’s privacy and manuscript distribution.
  6. Disclosure of conflicts of interest: The editor must understand the ethics in scientific publishing as outlined above to avoid any conflict of interest with other parties so that the manuscript publishing process can be carried on properly and safely. 

3.    Ethics for Reviewers

  1. Objectivity and neutrality: The reviewer must be fair, objective, unbiased, independent and only in favor of scientific truth. The review process must be carried out in a professional manner regardless of the author’s gender, business aspect, ethnicity, religion, race, group and citizenship.
  2. Clarity of reference sources: The reviewer must make sure that reference rources or quotations are appropriate and credible (accountable). If any errors or irregularities are found in the writing of reference sources or quotations, the reviewer must immediately inform the editorial department so that corrections can be made by the author according to the notes from the reviewer.
  3. Peer-reviewer effectiveness: The reviewer must respond to manuscripts submitted by the editorial department and work in accordance with the specified peer-reviewer time frame  (up to 2 weeks). If additional time is required for the review of the manuscript, it should promptly be notified to (confirmed with) the editorial secretariat.
  4. Disclosure of conflicts of interest: The reviewer must understand the ethics in scientific publishing as outlined above to avoid any conflict of interest with other parties so that the manuscript publishing process can be carried on properly and safely. 

4.    Ethics for Journal Manager

  1. Decision-making: The journal manager/editorial board must outline the missions and objectives of the organization, in particular those relating to the established policies and decisions concerning publishing journals without certain agenda or bias.
  2. Freedom: The journal manager must allow the reviewers and editors freedom to create a comfortable working atmosphere and respect the author’s privacy.
  3. Assurance and promotions: The journal manager must assure and protect the intellectual property rights (copyright), publish and promote journal publications to the public by providing assurance of benefits of using the manuscripts.
  4. Disclosure of conflicts of interest: The journal manager must understand the ethics in scientific publishing as outlined above to avoid any conflict of interest with other parties so that the manuscript publishing process can be carried on properly and safely.