Publication Ethics & Malpractice
I. PUBLICATION AND AUTHORSHIP
EJESS, as an international online e-journal, strictly adheres to the highest standards and ensures that all papers are subject to a strict review process from at least two international colleagues/experts in the field.
The publication takes into account the originality of the work, its significance, sound underlying principles and relevance. Reviewers also take into account its readability and language.
The research work reported in the paper should not have been published or have been submitted to another publication. It should be included in only one publication.
The Editors’ decisions are: acceptance, acceptance with revision, or rejection.
Authors that agree to revise and re-submit their paper should be aware that there is no guarantee that the revised version will be accepted.
Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
The paper acceptance may be constrained by legal requirements, including legal copyright infringements and plagiarism.
II. AUTHORS’ RESPONSIBILITIES
Authors guarantee that their manuscripts are their original work.
Authors must certify that the paper has not been previously published.
Authors must also certify that the manuscript is not considered for publication elsewhere.
All authors listed in the paper must have contributed significantly to its contents.
Authors must state that all information and data in the paper are real and authentic.
Authors must let the Editors know of any conflict of interest.
Authors ought to give proper reference identifying all sources used in their work or reported in their manuscript.
Authors must respond to the reviewer promptly and appropriately.
Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes if necessary.
Authors must promptly report to the Editors any errors found in their manuscript during the review process as well as after publication.
III. REVIEWERS’ RESPONSIBILITIES
All information regarding papers is to be kept confidential.
They ought to act objectively, without personal criticism of the authors.
Reviewers should point out relevant published work which has not been referred to by the authors.
Reviewers ought to call to the attention of the Editors any similarities between the paper under review and any other that they are aware of.
Reviewers should point out to the Editors any conflict of interest that may occur.
Reviewers should express their views clearly and indicate the reasons for them.
Reviewers should comment on the clarity of the manuscript as well as the scientific contents.
IV. EDITORS’ RESPONSIBILITIES
Editors have ultimate responsibility for the acceptance or rejection of any papers.
Editors are responsible for the contents and quality of the publication.
Editors should guarantee the quality of the paper and the integrity of the academic research.
Editors will base their decisions solely on the papers originality and importance, including its relevance to the publication’s scope.
Editors should not reverse their decision nor overturn the ones of previous editors without a special reason, in which case further reviews may be required.
Editors will preserve the anonymity of the reviewers.
Editors will accept a paper when reasonably certain that it fulfils the code of ethics and malpractice.
Editors will act promptly if they suspect misconduct and endeavour to make all reasonable attempts to resolve the matter.
Editors will ensure that the material published conforms to internationally accepted, ethical guidelines including having a clear picture of research funding sources.
Editors should not allow conflicts of interest to take place between authors, reviewers and other Board Members.