Publications ethics and publication malpractice statement

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND PUBLICATION MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

Our publication ethics and publication malpractice statement is mainly based on the Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (see Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) website). The following points are only intended to give a broad overview and are not exhaustive. We encourage our authors, reviewers and editors to refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) website. If you have any questions or concerns please also feel free to contact the Editor of the Journal.  

For Everyone - Authors, Reviewers and Editors

PSR and its authors, reviewers and editors should at all times:

  • promote fairness and equality and oppose every type of discrimination;
  • respect the confidentiality of others;
  • be transparent about real or apparent competing interests;
  • and promote the transparency of and respect for the academic record.

For Authors

  • Originality, plagiarism and acknowledgment of sources

Authors should guarantee that their work is original and written by them, has not been previously published and has not been submitted to another journal, and that they approppriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. 

  • Data reporting standards and data access and retention

Authors should ensure that the data presented is true and not manipulated. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Authors could be asked to provid the raw data of their study together with the paper for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. 

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

Authors should guarantee that participants in their research consent for their data to be reported and published. Authors should be prepared to present evidence of ethical research approval and to provide answers about ethical aspects. 

  • Authorship of the paper

Authors should ensure that all the authors of the paper are clearly identified, including ensuring that all individuals credited as authors participated in the actual authorship of the work and that all who participated are credited and have given consent for publication.

  • Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Authors should ensure that any real or apparent conflicting or competing interest is clearly stated on submission of their paper (including funding assistance). All sources of financial support for the paper should be disclosed.

For Reviewers

  • Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process. Reviews should be delivered in a timely way, according to the journal’s policies on that.

  • Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received must not be disclosed to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

  • Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted with views on the research to be expressed clearly with supporting arguments, free of any biases or discriminatory stances.

  • Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify cases in which relevant published work has not been cited nor referenced in the paper, or has not been so appropriately. Reviewers will notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have knowledge. 

  • Disclosure and conflict of interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships with any of the authors, companies or institutions associated with the papers. If in doubt about whether a conflict exists, a reviewer should be transparent and seek the views of the journal editor.

For Editors

  • Publication decisions

The editor(s) is responsible for deciding which of the paper submitted to the journal will be published. The decision will only be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, the study’s validity and its relevance to the journal’s scope.

The editor(s) is responsible to maintain and promote consistent ethical policies for his/her journal and to work with authors, reviewers and Editorial Board members as necessary to ensure that the journal’s ethics and publishing policies are applied.  In case of any concerns or if in doubt about whether a conflict exists, the editor should refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics.

  • Confidentiality

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

  • Disclosure and conflicts of interest

The editor will recognise and plan for instances where he/she could have a competing interest or the appearance of a competing interest. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author’s explicit written consent.