Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Muthanna Journal of Engineering and Technology (MJET) is having online ISSN 2572-0325 and print ISSN 2575-0317, half yearly international journal, being published in January and July by Al-Muthanna University, Iraq since year 2010.

It is an open access journal, which differs in the way traditional methods of publishing papers to the public get submitted, reviewed, authenticated and finally published. In Open Access publication practice neither readers nor his/her institution are charged for access to papers or other resources. Besides, users are capable to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link the full texts of such articles (see archive for more details) for any non-commercial purpose without the need for a subscription to the journal in which these articles are published. Journal ethics are as per Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The publication fees should be covered by the authors institution or research funds. These fees replace subscription fees and allow the journal to provide free published materials to all interested online visitors, particularly the researchers and young researchers from developing countries.

This journal applies its duties of guardianship along all stages of publishing keeping our ethical and other responsibilities. Also, it committed to ensuring that commercial revenue such as advertising and reprint has no effect on editorial decisions. Furthermore, Editorial Board will communicate with other journals and/or publishers if it is useful to editors.

 

Duties of Editors

  1. Fair play and editorial independence: Editors assess submitted manuscripts exclusively in terms of importance, novelty, study’s validity, clarity) and its relevance to the scope of journal, disregarding the authors’ perspiration, gender, ethnic origin, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions of editing and publishing are not determined by any other agencies outside the journal. The Editor-in-Chief has entire authority over all the editorial contents of the journal and the timing of publication of such contents.
  2. Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff are not allowed to detect any information about any submitted manuscript to people other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

  3. Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Editors and editorial board members are not allowed to use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the  authors’ written agreement. valuable information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of managing the manuscript should be kept confidential and not used for their own benefit. Editors should prevent themselves from considering articles in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the articles; instead, they will ask one of other members of the editorial board to handle the article.
  4. Publication decisions: The editors should ensure that all manuscripts submitted will be peer-reviewed  by at least two reviewers who are practiced in the discipline. The Editor-in-Chief is in charge of deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the importance of the work to researchers and readers, the positive action to reviewers’ comments, and such legal considerations as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may consult with other editors or reviewers to make the fair decision.
  5. Involvement and cooperation in investigations: Editors will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised regarding a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every unethical publishing behavior reported will be examined, even if it is explored years after publication. Dealing with cases of suspected misconduct makes AP-SMART editors follow the COPE Flowcharts. If, on investigation, the ethical concern is well-founded, correction, retraction, expression of concern or other notes as may be relevant, will be published in the journal.

 

Duties of Reviewer

  1. Contribution to editorial decisions: Peer review has a vital role in making the editorial decisions by helping editors through editorial communications with authors, in which the authors will know the weakness points in their manuscripts and then improve them. Peer review is very important process of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavor.
  2. Promptness: Any reviewer who invited to review an article and feels that the research is not within his / her field and he / she cannot write a useful scientific feedback or knows that the review of the manuscript will not be prompted should immediately inform the editors and decline the reviewing  invitation so an alternative reviewer can be selected.
  3. Confidentiality: The manuscripts which be sent to a referee for reviewing them should be considered and treated as a confidential document and they should not be shared or discussed with the others. In special cases and under expectational limited circumstances the manuscripts could be discussed with Editor-in-Chief if he authorized to do so. This applies also to any invited reviewer who do not accept the invitation of reviewing.
  4. Standards of objectivity: Reviews should be conducted an objective reviewing  and it should be formulated clearly and supported by clear arguments in order to enable the authors to improving their manuscript. Any personal criticism is not allowed.
  5. Acknowledgement of sources: Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been described in published work must be cited with the corresponding reference and relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors should be mentioned by the reviewer. Any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under reviewing and any published or unpublished works should be identified by reviewer and reported to the editor.
  6. Disclosure and conflicts of interest: The reviewing invitation should be declined by the reviewer if he has any conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript, so the editor could contact other expert to review the manuscript. The reviewer should have a written consent from the authors if he would like to use any of their unpublished material disclosed in their submitted manuscript in his own research. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

 

Duties of Authors

  1. Reporting standards: Accurate account of the work and results should be presented by the authors of original research. This should be followed by a discussion about the objective and significance of the work. Sufficient details and references should be included so that others can be able to replicate the work.
  2. Data access and retention: For editorial review, authors may be required to submit the raw data of their work with the manuscript. So, they might need to be prepared to make the data available publicly if practicable. In this way, authors must ensure that such data is accessible to other competent professionals for several years after publication, provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.
  3. Originality and plagiarism: Only entirely original work should be submitted by authors. If there was a necessity to use work and/or words of others, that should be appropriately cited. Influential publications in determining the nature of the work and explanation of results should also be acknowledged and cited. Plagiarism can be in different forms, such as copying another’s paper as the author’s own, and/or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper without citing them and claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is intolerable under any circumstance.
  4. Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication: Same papers can not be submitted for publication to other journals unless withdrawn or rejected. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is considered unethical and unacceptable behavior. Some replicate publication of some kinds of articles, such as clinical guidelines and translations, in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
  5. Authorship of the manuscript: Authorship means taking the public responsibility of the content of the paper. In this way, the persons listed in the authorship list of the manuscript should meet the following criteria: (i) They have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) They have drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) They have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. People who contributed in preparing and have substantial effect on the manuscript in different ways, such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support but could not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as authors. However, they should be acknowledged in the “Acknowledgements” section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. It is the corresponding author’s responsibility to ensure that all coauthors in the list have met the authorship criteria listed above.
  6. Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Authors should disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed are financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, membership, employment, consultancies, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements. The non-financial potential conflicts include personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should also be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if available).
  7. Acknowledgement of sources: Authors should ensure that they have cited publications of others that have been influential in their work. This could ensure that authors have properly acknowledged the work of others. Other information that have been obtained privately such as from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit and written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.
  8. Hazards and human or animal subjects: Some work involves chemicals, the procedure or equipment have unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed.
  9. Peer review: Authors are obliged to participation in the peer review process is mandatory for authors of the manuscript. They are obliged to cooperate and respond promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, and copyright permissions. Authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.
  10. Fundamental errors in published works: When significant errors or inaccuracies is discovered by authors after publishing their paper, they will be obliged to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate properly with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper. Guidelines on retracting or correcting articles are available in this link article withdraw policies.

 

Duties of the Publisher

  1. Handling of unethical publishing behavior: In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.
  2. Access to journal content: The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our own digital archive.