Publication Ethics

Ethics in Article Submission to JCST

Research Involving Animals or Humans or Biodiversities, must include an Ethics Certificate. Authors are required to upload a copy of the Ethics Certificate to the online system, and provide the certificate number and the issuing institution within the article. The authors should ensure that all procedures performed comply with relevant laws and institutional guidelines.  

Ethics in Writing Article (For Authors)

Publication ethics are compulsory for publication in JCST. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of ethical behaviors for all parties involved in the process of manuscript publication: the journal editors, the authors and the peer reviewers. The publication ethics guidelines adhere to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

1. Authorship: All authors must have agreed to the submission and to the order of their names on the title page. They must also have agreed that the corresponding author may act on their behalf throughout the editorial review and publication process.

2. Plagiarism: JCST maintains a strict zero-tolerance policy on plagiarism and data manipulation. All submissions are screened using "Turnitin." A similarity score above 20%, or the use of consecutive phrases exceeding 20 words from another source, raises suspicion. Clear plagiarism results in immediate rejection, while minor issues prompt a request for revision. If detected during review, the process will be paused, and the authors will be asked for an explanation. Rejection follows if the explanation is unsatisfactory or guilt is admitted. Post-publication, proven plagiarism leads to article retraction, with the authors’ institutions notified. Retractions will be promptly announced.

3. Conflicts of Interest: Authors must disclose any conflicts of interest that may influence the research or its interpretation. Transparency is essential to maintain the integrity of the research.

4. Data Integrity: Data submitted must be accurate, reliable, and free from manipulation or fabrication. All articles are screened using “Turnitin” software. A similarity score above 30% raises concerns of plagiarism and will result in a review by the Editor-in-Chief. Clear plagiarism leads to rejection, while minor issues result in a request for revision.

5. Research Misconduct: Plagiarism, falsification, or manipulation of data are strictly prohibited. If detected during the review process, the submission will be paused, and the authors will be contacted for explanation. Unsatisfactory responses will result in rejection. Published articles found to contain misconduct will be retracted, and the authors' institutions will be notified.

6. Ethical Concerns: Research involving human or animal subjects must comply with ethical standards, including the Declaration of Helsinki for human studies and ARRIVE guidelines for animal research. Authors must provide documentation of ethical approval, and informed consent must be obtained where necessary.

   If authors use figures or tables from other sources, proper permission must be obtained from the copyright holder, and full credit must be given in the caption. In cases where figures or tables are adapted from other sources, authors should clearly state "Adapted from [Source]" in the caption and ensure that the adaptation complies with the original copyright terms.

7. Consent for Publication: If your research or manuscript contains any individual person’s data (including personal details, images, or videos), consent for publication must be obtained from that individual, or in the case of minors, from their parent or legal guardian. All case report presentations must have consent for publication.

8. Contributor’s Publishing Agreement: Before publication, authors are required to sign a Journal Contributor’s Publishing Agreement, granting JCST the license to publish, display, store, copy, and reuse the content as necessary.

9. All funding sources must be disclosed in the acknowledgments and any conflicts of interest should be stated.

Ethics of Journal Editors

Conflicts of interest: Editors recuse themselves from the review process when they have a conflict of interest or personal stake in the publication of a research work.

Confidentiality: The editors of the Journal of Current Science and Technology (JCST) use a double-blind peer-review process. Neither the authors nor the reviewers know each other's identity. The editors are obliged to preserve confidentiality and shall not disclose the contents of the manuscript nor the identity of the author throughout the review process. Comments, information or ideas obtained through the peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be quoted or referenced by an editor without the express written consent of the author.

Objectivity: Decisions on publication are made objectively after reviewing the submitted manuscript and the peer reviews. The importance of the article's contribution to the existing research in its field, the quality of articulation of the argument, and the strength of the evidence provided are critical factors in the decision to publish.

Publication Decision: Journal editors will not accept articles which have been published (except in the form of an abstract) or are being considered for publication by another journal. Papers being considered here should not be submitted to other journals. The Editor-in-Chief should select reviewers based on the content and scope of the submitted manuscripts, reviewers’ area of expertise, and freedom from conflict of interest. The editors are responsible for deciding which articles should be published. The editors are guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Ethics of Reviewers

Confidentiality: Reviewers have to respect the confidentiality of the review process. They should not discuss aspects of the work under review with other researchers until when the article is published. Unpublished materials disclosed in a manuscript under review must not be quoted or referenced by a reviewer without the express written consent of the author, requested through the editor. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantages.

Conflicts of interest: If the reviewer realizes that he or she has been involved in the research described, knows the researchers involved in the research, or for any reason cannot give an objective review of the manuscript, the reviewer should inform the editors and decline the review. Conflicts of interest can include competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the paper under review.

Objectivity: Manuscripts should be reviewed objectively in the context of the reviewer’s expertise in the field. The importance of the article’s contribution to the existing research in its field, the quality of articulation of the argument, and the strength of the evidence provided are critical factors in reviewing the quality of a manuscript. Personal opinions without evidence should not be used as criteria for review decision.

Acknowledgment of sources: Reviewers should identify importantly relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. A reviewer should also inform the editor any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.