Publication Ethics

               The journal has outlined the roles and responsibilities of the Author, Editor, and Reviewer to ensure that all three parties study and strictly adhere to these guidelines. This is intended to benefit all stakeholders involved, as well as readers. The details are as follows:

Roles and Responsibilities of the Author

1. Authors must guarantee that the article is original and has not been previously published in any other journal.
2. Authors are required to properly cite others’ work and prepare a reference list at the end of the article.
3. Authors must follow the specified journal format accurately.
4. All authors named in the article must have participated in the research.
5. Authors are obligated to disclose any conflicts of interest clearly.

Roles and Responsibilities of the Editor

1. The editor is responsible for selecting quality articles for publication.
2. Editors must not disclose information regarding authors or reviewers to any unrelated individuals during the review process.
3. The decision to select an article should be based on its significance, novelty, clarity, and consistency with the journal’s policy.
4. Editors should avoid publishing articles that have already been published elsewhere.
5. The editor should not reject articles based solely on suspicion or uncertainty.
6. Editors must not have conflicts of interest with anyone involved in the publication process.
7. Editors are expected to rigorously check for plagiarism using reliable tools to ensure articles published are free from plagiarism.
8. If plagiarism is detected during the review process, the editor will suspend the review and contact the lead author immediately for an explanation, which will be considered in deciding whether to "accept" or "reject" the article.

Roles and Responsibilities of the Reviewer

1. Reviewers must maintain confidentiality and not disclose any part of the article to unrelated parties during the review.
2. If reviewers recognize a conflict of interest with the authors after receiving the article, such as having collaborated or personally knowing the authors, they should inform the editor and decline the review.
3. Reviewers should evaluate articles within their area of expertise, taking into account the significance of the article’s content to academic progress, the quality of analysis, and the rigor of the work, without relying on unsupported personal opinions.
4. Reviewers are encouraged to suggest important research works that align with the article and should inform the editor of any similarities or redundancies with other works.