Publication ethics

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
 

The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journal BJAS is to support the standard and respected knowledge transfer network. Our publication ethics and publication malpractice statement is mainly based on the Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (Committee on Publication Ethics, 2011) that includes;

  1. General duties and responsibilities of editors.
  2. Relations with readers.
  3. Relations with authors.
  4. Relations with editors.
  5. Relations with editorial board members.
  6. Relations with journal owners and publishers.
  7. Editorial and peer review processes.
  8. Protecting individual data.
  9. Encouraging ethical research (e.g. research involving humans or animals).
  10. Dealing with possible misconduct.
  11. Ensuring the integrity of the academic record.
  12. Intellectual property.
  13. Encouraging debate.
  14. Complaints.
  15. Conflicts of interest.
Reference:
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2011, March 7). Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Retrieved from http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf
 
 
Multiple and Simultaneous Submission/Publication
The practice of duplicate submission/publication is considered unethical because it exaggerates the findings, wastes the times of editors, peer reviewers, and readers, and also breaks the integrity of science. In case multiple submission/publication, we will contact the author(s), will state that submitted work has already been submitted/published elsewhere, and will ask for explanation about that. If the author gives a sufficient and reasonable explanation, we reject the submission without penalties. However, if the author does not respond, the explanation is unsatisfactory, or the author admits guilt, we will reject the submission with penalties, including; sending a letter of warning, put the authors in the Authors black list, writing to the Journal that published the paper, imposing the authors to pay $200 the fee of reviewing, and informing the author's superior about the misconduct.