Academy & Industry Research Collaboration Center (AIRCC)

Publication Ethics

AIRCC is committed to peer review integrity and practices the highest standards of ethical publishing across all AIRCC journals. We publish original research papers that has not been published nor under review elsewhere. AIRCC publication ethics encourages integrity in research and peer review process as outlined below and we prohibit any malpractices regarding publication. AIRCC uses Docloc tool to verify the originality of every submitted manuscript. AIRCC promotes new research and scientific applications in the field of Computer science & Engineering and allied fields. We provide high quality and flexible information solutions to researchers.

Ethical Guidelines

Review Process

All manuscripts will be subject to a well established, fair, unbiased peer review and refereeing procedure, and are considered on the basis of their significance, novelty and usefulness to the Journals readership. The reviewing structure will always ensure the anonymity of the referees & it will be reviewed by 3 experts in the field. For more details , please visit “Review Process“ section.

Plagiarism

Using another person’s ideas, language, graphs, pictures, results and experiments without giving credit to them. Without citing the source, copying even a single sentence from your own or another person’s research paper leaded to plagiarism. AIRCC uses Docloc tool to verify the originality of every submitted manuscript. The plagiarized submissions will be rejected and the authors will face sanctions. If there is a plagiarism issue found in the published article, it will be either corrected or retracted.

Duplicate submission / Redundant publications or Self plagiarism

Redundant publications or Self plagiarism– It primarily refers to publishing the same material / experiments more than once. It refers to the situation that one study is split into several parts and submitted to two or more journals. Or the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification. “Self-plagiarism” is considered a form of redundant publication. It concerns recycling or borrowing content from previous work without citation. This practice is widespread and might be unintentional. Articles based on content previously posted on a preprint, institutional repositories and thesis will not be considered as a redundant publications. The extended version of the conference article with substantial improvement with proper citations, permissions will be considered for possible publications. Submissions are accepted for review with the understanding that the same work has been neither submitted to, nor published in, another publication. Simultaneous submission to other publications will result in immediate rejection of the paper and face sanctions. AIRCC’s authors, readers, reviewers and editors encouraged to complain any suspicions of self-plagiarism by contacting the relevant editor or by emailing ethics@airccse.org

Falsification, Fabrication and Image Manipulation

Making up data or results and recording or reporting them is fabrication of data. Falsification of data is manipulating research materials, omitting/deletion/suppression of conflicting data without justification and this would cause mistrust and disgrace to scientific community. The submissions or published articles that identified for falsification, fabrication, or misrepresentation of the results, including the manipulation of Images, may lead to actions and published articles may be retracted.

Note: Translations of articles without proper permission or notification and resubmission of previously published articles are considered duplications.

Authorship

All persons who meet authorship criteria are listed as authors, and all authors certify that they have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for the content, including participation in the concept, design, analysis, writing, or revision of the manuscript.

Authors mentioned in the article should strictly be someone who has made a significant intellectual or scholarly contribution to the research described in the research output, are willing to be accountable for their contribution, and agree to be listed as an author. Any person who helped technically to the experiments, survey or manuscript preparation may be acknowledged with their approval. Third party submissions will not be accepted for review process. Researchers are encouraged to talk about authorship with all those involved in the research and it’s the responsibility of the author to get approval from co-authors that he/she will act on behalf of the co-authors. Including authors who have not contributed to the research in the manuscript and excluding authors who have contributed to the research is unacceptable author contribution.

Citation Manipulation

Citing irrelevant articles that don’t contribute to content of manuscript is a kind of scientific misconduct. Editors, reviewers are not permitted to ask authors to include their own articles, or an Associate work, articles published in the journal or associated journal to references. Such kind of actions will lead to actions.

Conflicts of Interest and Funding

A conflict of interest occurs when an individual’s objectivity is potentially compromised by a desire for financial gain, prominence, professional advancement or a successful outcome. Authors are fully responsible to disclose any conflict of interest, perceived or potential conflict of interest that may bias their work, and acknowledge all financial support and any other personal connections. Even if there is no conflict of interest, the authors should state that clearly in the article. The corresponding author is responsible for co-authors declaring their conflict of interest. In addition to the conflicts of interest, authors are also required to declare funding statement.

Conflicts of interest include any circumstances where an author has a real, perceived or potential opportunity to prefer their own interests, or those of any other person or organization, to the interests of the University.

Authors must declare all potential interests in a ‘Conflicts of interest’ section, which should explain the details. Even if there is no conflict of interests, the authors should state that in the article. Corresponding author is responsible for coauthors declaring their conflict of Interests.

Authors / Editors / Reviewers must declare all potential interests in a ‘Conflicts of interest’ section, which should explain why the interest may be a conflict. If there are none, the authors should state “The author(s) declare(s) that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.”

Editors/reviewers should consider situations such as being recent co-author, recent colleague, supervisor, personal relationship, and financial gainer are considered as conflicts.

If conflicts of interest are found in a published article, publish a corrigendum or reassess the review process or retraction might be necessary. Conflict of interest must be declared and it doesn’t stop a publication of work or some one’s involvement in the review process.

Libel, Defamation and Freedom of Expression

As an Open Access publisher, AIRCC doesn’t support publishing false statements that harm the reputation of individuals, groups, or organizations.

Fraudulent Research and Research Misconduct

Any published article identified to include fraudulent results will be retracted, or expression of concern or an appropriate correction will be issued. We work with editors, reviewers and other appropriate institutions to investigate fraudulent research and research misconduct.

Retractions, Corrections and Expressions of Concern

The Journal will issue a corrigendum to correct the errors of the authors. If the journal is responsible for the error, it will issue an erratum. If the article is seriously flawed that their findings or concluding remarks should not be relied upon, it may be retracted. All authors, author’s institutions, editors and others involved will be consulted by the publisher for the course of the action and all authors will be required to agree the action by journal.

Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

AIRCC journals are peer reviewed by two or three reviewers and the editor-in-chief makes the final decision. It is expected that Editors and reviewers during the review process should be principled, prompt, act with confidence, contribution to the final decision, acknowledge source, and stick to objectives and guidelines mentioned below

  • Reviewers should understand that the peer review process is confidential. The review process should not be shared with anyone outside the peer review process.
  • Reviewers clearly understand that review process should be unbiased and author deserves full credit for their work.
  • Reviewers should submit a comprehensive and substantial peer review report in a timely manner. If there is delay, it should be communicated to the editor.
  • Reviewers must communicate to the Editor-in Chief if the papers are plagiarized or published elsewhere.

Ethical Guidelines for Editors-in-Chief/Editorial Board Member

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision to publish the manuscript in the journal based on peer-reviewers comments. It is expected that Editors during the review process should be principled, prompt, act with confidence, contribution to the final decision, acknowledge source, and stick to objectives and guidelines mentioned below

  • Editors should understand that the peer review process is confidential.  The review process should not be shared with anyone outside the peer review process.
  • Editors clearly understand that review process should be unbiased and author deserves full credit for their work.
  • Editor-in-Chief should discuss all matter regarding publication with the Editorial board members before making a final decision.
  • Editors should automatically reject manuscript that are inappropriate or out of scope of the journal.
  • Editors must investigate if they receive information that a manuscript is plagiarized, under consideration elsewhere or has already been published. If there is evidence that the manuscript has been plagiarized, under consideration elsewhere or has already been published, then the Editor-in-Chief  should issue an erratum

Prohibited Author’s List (PAL)

If there is a violation of any of the above said policies in any of the AIRCC journals, the manuscript will be rejected or removed. The author will be entered in the PAL database and prohibited to contribute for the next 3 years.

Suggestions

If you have any suggestions to improve the content of this document, please send those to secretary@airccse.org