Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Academic Research Journal of Science and Technology (ARJST) is a non-profit organization composed of esteemed scholars in engineering and science, dedicated to advancing research and technologies within these fields through digital means. As a peer-reviewed international journal, ARJST upholds a clear set of ethical standards for all parties involved in the publication of an article. This includes authors, editors, peer reviewers, and the publisher, and is aligned with the Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

Publishing in a peer-reviewed journal like ARJST serves as a fundamental element in establishing a coherent and respected body of knowledge. It reflects not only the quality of the authors’ work but also the support from their affiliated institutions. Peer-reviewed articles are essential to the integrity of the scientific method, making it vital to set clear ethical expectations for every party involved—authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, the publisher, and broader scholarly society.

At ARJST, we take our responsibilities as a publisher very seriously, particularly in our role as custodians of the publication process. We are committed to ethical practices throughout all stages of publishing and assure that advertising, reprints, or any other commercial interests do not influence editorial decisions. Furthermore, the Editorial Board is available to facilitate communication with other journals and publishers when needed.

Publication Decisions

The responsibility for determining which articles are published in the JST journal lies with its editors. Their decisions must be informed by the validity of the work and its significance to researchers and readers alike. The editors will be guided by the policies set forth by the journal's editorial board and will adhere to applicable legal standards concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. To assist in these decisions, editors may consult with other editorial team members or reviewers.

Fair Play

Editors are committed to evaluating manuscripts solely based on their intellectual merit, without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic background, citizenship, or political ideology.

Confidentiality

Editors and their editorial staff are obligated to maintain confidentiality regarding any submitted manuscripts. Such information should only be disclosed to the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher as necessary.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors must not utilize any unpublished materials from a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the explicit written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

The peer review process is instrumental in aiding editors to make informed decisions regarding manuscripts. It also provides authors with constructive feedback that can enhance the quality of their work.

Promptness

If a selected reviewer feels unqualified to assess a manuscript or knows that they cannot review it promptly, they should inform the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Confidentiality

Reviewers are required to treat all manuscripts under consideration as confidential documents. They must not share or discuss these manuscripts with anyone outside of the authorized editorial team.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted with objectivity, and personal attacks on authors are unacceptable. Reviewers should present their opinions clearly and back them up with reasoned arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers play a crucial role in identifying relevant published research that the authors may have overlooked. Any claim that an observation, conclusion, or argument has been previously documented should be substantiated with proper citations. Furthermore, reviewers must inform the editor of any significant similarities or overlaps between the manuscript they are reviewing and other published works that they are aware of.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

It is imperative that any confidential information or ideas acquired during the peer review process remain private and are not used for personal gain. Reviewers should refrain from evaluating manuscripts if they have any conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors or any affiliated companies or institutions.

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research must provide an accurate depiction of the work undertaken and offer an unbiased analysis of its implications. The data underlying the research should be accurately represented within the manuscript. Sufficient detail and citations must be included to enable others to replicate the study. Any fraudulent or knowingly false statements are deemed unethical and unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors should be prepared to share raw data for editorial review and, if feasible, provide public access to this data in accordance with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases. Additionally, authors should retain this data for a reasonable duration following publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their works are completely original. When utilizing the ideas or language of others, it is essential to provide appropriate citations or quotations.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

In general, an author should avoid publishing manuscripts that essentially replicate the same research across multiple journals. Submitting the same manuscript to various journals at the same time is considered unethical and unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must give proper credit to the work of others by citing influential publications that have shaped their research.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be reserved for individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research presented. All significant contributors should be listed as co-authors. Those who have participated in specific areas of the research that do not merit authorship should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all appropriate co-authors are included in the manuscript, that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version, and that they consent to its submission for publication.

Hazards Related to Human or Animal Subjects

In cases where the research involves the use of chemicals, processes, or equipment that possess any unique hazards, authors are required to explicitly outline these risks within their manuscript.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

It is essential for all authors to fully disclose any financial or substantial conflicts of interest that could be perceived as influencing the outcomes or interpretations presented in their manuscript. Additionally, authors must provide details about all sources of financial support related to their research project.

Addressing Significant Errors in Published Works

Should an author identify a substantial error or inaccuracy in their published work, it is their responsibility to promptly inform the journal editor or publisher. The author must collaborate with the editor to either retract or amend the paper accordingly.