Principles of professional ethics in the work of the editor and publisher
The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions.
• an editor should make decisions on which articles to publish based on representational faithfulness and scholarly importance of the proposed work.
• an editor should be alert to intellectual property issues and must not to publish information if there are reasons to think that it is plagiarism. ·
• an editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, social set-up or political philosophy of the authors.
• unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
• an editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.
Ethical principles in the work of the reviewer
Publishers should provide reasonable practical support to editors and define the relationship between publishers, editor and other parties in a contract.
• publishers should protect intellectual property and copyright.
• publishers should foster editorial independence.
• publishers should work with journal editors to set journal policies appropriately and aim to meet those policies, particularly with respect to editorial independence, research ethics, authorship, transparency and integrity (for example, conflicts of interest research funding, reporting standards), peer review and the role of the editorial team beyond that of the journal editor, appeals and complaints.
• publishers should communicate and periodically review journal policies (for example, to authors, readers, peer reviewers).
• publishers should assist the parties (for example, institutions, grant funders, governing bodies) responsible for the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, facilitate in the resolution of these cases.
• publishers are responsible for publishing corrections, clarifications and retractions.
Ethical principles in the reviewer work
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. That is why actions of a reviewer should be unbiased.
• any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
• reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
• unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
• 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 excuse himself from the review process.