Code of ethichs
THESE GUIDELINES ARE
FULLY CONSISTENT WITH THE COPE PRINCIPLES OF TRANSPARENCY AND BEST PRACTICE
GUIDELINES AND THE COPE CODE OF CONDUCT.
Editor's
Duties
The
Editorial Board of AUB – Seria Drept ensures that ethical standards of
scientific publications are maintained and take all reasonable steps to
identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has
occurred, including, among others, plagiarism, citation manipulation, data
fabrication. Manuscripts submitted for publication in AUB – Seria Drept are
evaluated for accuracy, compliance with ethical standards and usefulness for
science.
Publication Decisions
The Editorial Board will decide, based on the
Abstracts submitted, which will be published in each issue. The Editorial Board
may confer with the Scientific Board as part of the decision-making process.
The Editorial Board is constrained by copyright infringement and plagiarism.
After acceptance, the Editorial Board should not overturn its decision to
publish unless serious problems are identified with the submission.
Fair play
The Editorial Board evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content regardless of race,
gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or
political philosophy of the authors. The Editorial Board’s decision to accept
or reject a paper for publication should be based only on the paper's
importance, originality and clarity and the study's relevance to the aim of the
journal.
Confidentiality
The Editorial Board, the Scientific Board and any
editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript.
Editors will ensure that submitted material remains confidential while under
review.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted
manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the author’s
consent. The Editorial Board and its decisions are completely independent from
the Publisher.
Procedures for dealing with unethical behaviour
Unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to
the attention of the Editorial Board and
publisher at any time, by anyone. Whoever informs the editorial board and
publisher of such
conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence for an investigation
to be
initiated. If plagiarism is found after publishing, the Editorial Board will
contact the author for a response to the allegations. In cases of proven
plagiarism or no-response/non-adequate response, the offending paper will
be retracted and a statement from the publisher will be inserted in its place
in the relevant journal issue.
Reviewer's
Duties
Contribution to editorial improvements
Recommendations by peer reviewers should be transmitted, by the editorial staff, to the authors aiming improvements of the manuscripts.
Promptness
If the reviewer feels unqualified to review the
research in the manuscript or knows that a prompt review on his/her behalf will
not be possible, he/she should notify the editorial staff and the Editorial
Board and excuse himself/herself from the review process.
Confidentiality
Reviewers must not disclose any information about a
submitted manuscript. Editors and
reviewers should ensure that material submitted remains confidential while
under review.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism
of the author is inappropriate.
Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgment of Sources and Identification of Possible Plagiarism
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
Statements, observations or arguments previously reported should be accompanied
by a relevant citation. A reviewer should also call the editor’s attention to
any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under
consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal
knowledge.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without consent from the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through the peer-review process must be kept confidential and not be used for personal advantage.
Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of
interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or
connections with any of the authors,
companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Author's
Duties
Originality and
plagiarism
Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed significantly to, or the analysis of the study, those who have participated in the preparation of the manuscript and have approved the final version of the manuscript. The author should ensure that all co-authors are listed in the manuscript, have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication. Other persons who have had an impact on some important aspects of a scholarly manuscript should be listed or shown as collaborators.
Ghostwriting/guest authorship are manifestations of scientific
misconduct and any detected cases will be revealed, including notification of
the entities concerned. Manifestations of scientific misconduct will be
documented by the Editors.
The authors should
ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have
used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or
quoted. Authors found to have plagiarized material will be withdrawn from
publication consideration. If plagiarism is found after publishing, the Editorial
Board will contact the author for a response to the allegations. In cases of
proven plagiarism or no-response/non-adequate response, the offending paper
will be retracted and a statement from the publisher will be inserted in its
place in the relevant journal issue.
Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
An author should not submit for consideration in
another journal a previously published paper. Submitting the same manuscript to
more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour.
Acknowledgement of sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of other should always
be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in
determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a
significant contribution to the
conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All
those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
Where there are others who participated in certain substantial aspects of the
research project, they should be acknowledge are listed as contributors. The
corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors have seen
and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all
co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have
agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any
financial or other substantive conflict of
interest that might influence the results or interpretation of the manuscript.
All sources of
financial support for the project should be disclosed
Fundamental Errors in Published Work
When an author discovers significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the Editorial Board and to work with the editorial team to correct or retract the paper.
Where any scientific misconduct is detected. the Editorial Board will
apply the guidelines proposed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE -
https://publicationethics.org/).