Publication Ethics and Malpractice

The JPAIR Multidisciplinary Research is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. All authors submitting their works for publication as original articles attest that the submitted works represent their authors’ contributions and have not been copied or plagiarized in whole or in part from other works. The Journal is dedicated to conducting objective and fair double-blind peer assessment of all works submitted for publication, as well as avoiding any actual or prospective conflicts of interest between editorial and review personnel and the reviewed material. As such, JPAIR follows the COPE’s (https://publicationethics.org/) guidelines on publication ethics and malpractice.

Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

 • Publication Decisions
The editor’s main responsibility is to decide which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The decision is exclusively based on the paper’s importance, originality, clarity, validity, and its relevance to the journal's scope. Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism should also be considered. The editor may consult with other editorial team members in making this decision.

• Fair Play
The editor must ensure that every manuscript submitted to the journal is evaluated for its intellectual merit, regardless of the authors' sex, gender, race, ethnicity, religion, nationality, etc.

• Confidentiality
Only required or appropriate information regarding a submitted paper should be disclosed to the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial board members, or publisher.

• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by the editor for independent research studies without the author's express written consent..

Duties of Reviewers

• Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the Editor in editorial decisions and, through editorial interaction with the author, may also help the author in polishing the manuscript.

• Promptness
Any chosen reviewer who believes they are inadequate to evaluate the research presented in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible inform the editor and withdraw from the review process.

• Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be considered confidential documents. They cannot be discussed or shown to anybody without the editor's permission.

• Standards of Objectivity
Reviewers should strive to be objective in their assessments. Comments from reviewers should be well-written and supported with facts or arguments. Personal criticism of the author(s) is not appropriate.

• Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. Any claim that a certain observation, derivation, or argument has already been recorded should be supported by the appropriate citation. Any significant overlap or resemblance between the manuscript under consideration and any other published data that the reviewer is aware of should be brought to the editor's notice.

• Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Any invited referee who has relationships or connections with any of the authors, businesses or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein that could be construed as competitive, cooperative, or other relationships or connections should immediately notify the editors to declare their relationships or connections and decline the invitation to review so that substitute reviewers can be contacted.

Duties of Authors

• Reporting Standards
Authors of reports on original research should give a factual account of the work done and an objective assessment of its significance. The paper should accurately reflect the underlying data. A paper should have sufficient information and sources to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are inappropriate and represent unethical behavior.

• Originality, Plagiarism, and Acknowledgement of Sources
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. A writer shouldn't often submit submissions explaining the same study in more than one journal or principal publication. This is known as multiple, redundant, or contemporaneous publication. The simultaneous submission of the same paper to multiple journals is unacceptable and is considered unethical publishing practice. Always give due credit to other people's contributions. Additionally, publications that helped define the character of the presented study should be cited by the author/s.

• Authorship of a Manuscript
Only authors who significantly contributed to the conception, design, implementation, or interpretation of the reported study should be granted the right of authorship. Co-authors should be recognized for everyone who contributed significantly. Other individuals who have contributed to the research endeavor in meaningful ways should be recognized or identified as contributors when applicable. The corresponding author is responsible for making sure that the manuscript has all necessary co-authors, none of whom should be, and that all co-authors have seen, approved, and agreed to the paper's 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 be construed to influence the results or their interpretation of the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

• Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When 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. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or to provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.