:::
:::

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Survey Research – Method and Application (ISSN:1028-1649) is a scholarly journal committed to publication of research papers on survey research. Calls for papers are open and all submissions are peer-reviewed. Papers published must conform to the standards of expected ethical behavior. Survey Research – Method and Application rejects manuscripts with plagiarized content, those with submission to multiple journals, containing fraudulent data, authored by a third party, or failing to reveal conflicts of interest. The Journal follows the ethical standards of “Publishing Ethics” set up by Elsevier B.V. (https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/publishing-ethics) and COPE (Committee of Publication Ethics) (http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines). In the procedures of peer review and publication, the editor in chief, the editorial board and the publisher abide by the guidelines and criteria mentioned above to ensure that there will be no violation of publication ethics or related malpractice.

 

Duties of Editors

1.     Decision on the Publication of Articles

The editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor in chief is guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and will reject any material that breaks any legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

2.     Fair Play

Manuscripts shall be evaluated solely on their intellectual merit, without discrimination on the grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, or ethnic or geographical origin of the authors. Manuscripts for special issues shall be handled in the same way as other submissions, so that articles are considered and accepted solely on their academic merit and without commercial influence.

3.     Confidentiality

The editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and other editorial advisers.

4.     Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials in a submitted manuscript must not be used by anyone who has access to the manuscript (while handling it) without the written consent of the author. If a member on the editorial board or an editorial staff is listed as a contributor of a submitted manuscript, he or she must declare a conflict of interest and refrain from performing any reviewing tasks or decisions related to the manuscript.

5.     Plagiarism

Editorial staff must check the originality and similarity of all the submitted manuscripts. Manuscripts that are found to have been plagiarized from a manuscript by other authors, whether published or unpublished, will incur plagiarism sanctions.

 

Duties of Reviewers

1.     Contribution to editorial decision

Reviewers assist the editors and the editorial board in making editorial decisions, while the comments which arise from peer review may also assist the author in improving the paper.

2.     Promptness

Any reviewer who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or unable to provide a prompt review should notify the editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process.

3.     Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editors. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

4.     Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. There shall be no personal criticism of the author. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

5.     Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Reviewers should call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

6.     Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers should be aware of any potential conflicts of interest and decline to review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from financial, competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors.

 

Duties of Authors

1.     Originality

All submitted articles should be original works and not concurrently under consideration by any other publication. An author should not borrow substantially from his or her own previously published works nor submit manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.

2.     Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data for editorial review and should be prepared to retain the data for a reasonable time after publication.

3.     Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in their own work. If authors have drawn on the work of others or directly quoted the words of others, such works and direct quotes must be appropriately acknowledged and cited in notes or listed in the references at the end of the article. An article should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to locate published sources. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

4.     Authorship

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 have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

5.     Corresponding

When authors receive revision notification from the Editorial Assistant, the authors are responsible for uploading the revised manuscript within the timeline stipulated by the Editorial Board and reviewers. The corresponding author is responsible for communicating with the journal for publication. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper. All co-authors should have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

6.     Acknowledgment of Funding Sources

Sources of funding for the research reported in the article should be acknowledged at the end of the article. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

7.     Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Conflict of interest exists when an author’s private interests might be seen as influencing the objectivity of research. It is the responsibility of the author to confirm whether any of the co-authors hold any conflict of interest and to notify the editor prior to acceptance. All sources of funding, sponsors and any relevant financial and nonfinancial interests and relationships that might be considered likely to affect the interpretation of the findings should be declared, either through the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript or at the point of submission.

8.     Fundamental Errors in Published Works

If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

 

Dealing with Unethical Behavior

1.     Identification of unethical behavior

Misconduct and unethical behavior may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone. The person who informs the editor or publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated.

2.     Investigation

The Editorial Board will conduct a thorough case review as soon as any unethical conduct is reported to the Board. The case review will be conducted in a timely, objective, and professional manner to protect the privacy and safety of the reporter(s). Evidence should be gathered in a discreet manner to avoid spreading any allegations beyond those who need to know.

3.     Outcomes

When minor misconduct occurs, the Journal will inform the author or reviewer where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.

When serious misconduct occurs, the editors should decide whether or not to involve the employers, either by examining the available evidence themselves or by further consultation with a limited number of experts. The Journal may send a formal letter to the head of the author's or reviewer's department or funding agency.

If a submitted or published manuscript is plagiarized, fabricated, or falsified, the Journal reserves the right to impose a formal embargo on contributions from the author(s) for a defined period, or reject any future manuscript submitted by the same author(s) and ask for compensation.

The Journal may also report the case to a professional organization or higher authority for further investigation and action.

AD1AD2AD3
cron web_use_log