All submitted manuscripts are assessed by the editor for suitability for the review process and scope of the JGEDC. And then manuscripts are sent at least two refrees. The period of review process approximately two months. Manuscripts should be written in accordance with the 6th edition of publication manual of the American Psychological Association (APA). Manuscripts should be submitted in MS Word. It should be use a normal 11-point Garamond for text. It should be use single space. It should not be indent the first line of paragraphs, and other paragraphs are indented 0.50 cm. And it should be sent by e-mail to the email@example.com. JGEDC holds copyrights for all articles published in the journal. Authors are responsible for article contents published in the journal. JGEDC is a nonprofit journal which does not charge publication fees to the Author(s) during publishing period including submission and processing of article review.
Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity (JGEDC) does not officially agree with the ideas of manuscripts published in the journal. Scientific and legal responsibilities of published manuscripts belong to their authors. Materials such as pictures, figures, tables etc. sent with manuscripts should be original or written approval of copyright holder should be sent with manuscript for publishing in both printed and online versions if they were published before. Authors agree that they transfer all publishing rights to the JGEDC, the publisher or owner of the journal. Copyrights of all published contents (text and visual materials) belong to the journal. No payment is done for manuscripts under the name of copyright or others approved for publishing in the journal and no publication cost is charged. To promote the development of global Open Access (Please read: Read the Budapest Open Access Initiative) to scientific information and research, the Publisher/Owner of the JEGYS provides copyrights of all online published papers (except where otherwise noted) for free use of readers, scientists, and institutions (such as link to the content or permission for its download, distribution, printing, copying, and reproduction in any medium, without any changing and except the commercial purpose), under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) International License, provided the original work is cited. To get permission for commercial purpose please contact the publisher/owner of the JGEDC.
Note: Some articles which selected by editor of JGEDC submit to the online submission ERIC.
Guide to Authors/Contributors
We welcome the submission of manuscripts that meets the general criteria of significance and scientific excellence. Papers will be published approximately upon acceptance by JEGYS Editors Electronic submission of manuscripts is strongly encouraged, provided that the text, tables, and figures are included in a single Microsoft Word (MS-word) file (Garamond font). All submissions are should be sent to firstname.lastname@example.org
Submission of manuscript can be made via links on the different journal home pages. An acknowledgement letter with manuscript tracking number will be mailed to the corresponding author immediately. (Note: We will only accept papers submitted Microsoft office word format (.doc and .docx).
Types of manuscripts for submission includes:
These should describe new and carefully confirmed findings, and experimental procedures should be given in sufficient detail for others to verify the work. The length of a full paper should be the minimum required to describe and interpret the work clearly.
A Short Communication is suitable for recording the results of complete small investigations or giving details of new models or hypotheses, innovative methods, techniques or apparatus. The style of main sections need not conform to that of full-length papers. Short communications are 2 to 4 printed pages (about 6 to 12 manuscript pages) in length.
Submissions of book, conference or case reviews and perspectives covering topics of current interest are welcome and encouraged. Reviews should be concise and no longer than 4-6 printed pages (about 12 to 18 manuscript pages). Reviews are also peer-reviewed. Critical Reviews, Surveys, Opinions, Commentaries and Essays Submissions of surveys, opinions, commentaries, essays and perspectives covering topics of current interest are welcome and encouraged.
All manuscripts are double blind reviewed by an editor and members of the Editorial Board or qualified peer-reviewers. Decisions will be made as rapidly as possible, and the journal strives to send reviewers' evaluation to authors within 4 weeks. The editorial board will re-evaluate manuscripts that are accepted pending revision. All published articles in this peer-reviewed journal will be reviewed by members of the editorial board and reviewers, and it is the goal of JGEDC, to publish manuscripts within 8 weeks after submission.
All portions of the manuscript must be typed 1,15 and all pages numbered starting from the title page.
The Title should be a brief phrase describing the contents of the paper. The Title Page should include the authors' full names and affiliations, the name of the corresponding author along with phone, fax and E-mail information. Present addresses of authors should appear as a footnote.
The Abstract should be informative and completely self-explanatory, briefly present the topic, state the scope of the experiments, indicate significant data, and point out major findings and conclusions. The Abstract should be 250 to 300 words in length. Complete sentences and syntax, active verbs, and the third person should be used, and the abstract should be written in the past tense. Standard nomenclature should be used and abbreviations should be avoided. No literature should be cited.
Following the abstract, about 3 to 10 key words that will provide indexing references should be listed.
A list of non-standard abbreviations should be added. In general, non-standard abbreviations should be used only when the full term is very long and used often. Each abbreviation should be spelled out and introduced in parentheses the first time it is used in the text.
The Introduction should provide a clear statement of the problem, the relevant literature on the subject, and the proposed approach or solution. It should be understandable to colleagues from a broad range of diverse disciplines.
Materials and methods should be complete enough to allow experiments to be reproduced. However, only truly new procedures should be described in detail; previously published procedures should be cited, and important modifications of published procedures should be mentioned briefly. Capitalize trade names and include the manufacturer's name and address. Subheadings should be used. Methods in general use need not be described in detail.
Results should be presented with clarity and precision. The results should be written in the past tense when describing findings in the authors' experiments. Previously published findings should be written in the present tense. Results should be explained, but largely without referring to the literature. Discussion, speculation and detailed interpretation of data should not be included in the Results but should be put into the Discussion section.
The Discussion should interpret the findings in view of the results obtained in this and in past studies on this topic. State the conclusions in a few sentences at the end of the paper. The Results and Discussion sections can include subheadings, and when appropriate, both sections can be combined.
The Acknowledgments of people, grants, funds, etc should be brief.
Please provides scholarly information about author/s of 100 to 150 words must also be submitted. Leave 2 blank lines after bio-data with photograph and full contact addresses.
Tables should be kept to a minimum and be designed to be as simple as possible. Tables are to be typed double-spaced throughout, including headings and footnotes. Each table should be on a separate page, numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals and supplied with a heading and a legend. Tables should be self-explanatory without reference to the text. The details of the methods used in the experiments should preferably be described in the legend instead of in the text. The same data should not be presented in both table and graph form or repeated in the text.
Figure legends should be typed in numerical order on a separate sheet. Graphics should be prepared using applications capable of generating high resolution GIF, TIFF, JPEG or PowerPoint before pasting in the Microsoft Word manuscript file.
Tables should be prepared in Microsoft Word. Use Arabic numerals to designate figures and upper case letters for their parts (Figure 1). Begin each legend with a title and include sufficient description so that the figure is understandable without reading the text of the manuscript. Information given in legends should not be repeated in the text.
References: In the text, a reference identified by means of an author's surname should be followed by the date of the reference in parentheses. When there are more than two authors, only the first author's name should be mentioned, followed by 'et al'. In the event that an author cited has had two or more works published during the same year, the reference, both in the text and in the reference list, should be identified by a lower case letter like 'a' and 'b' after the date to distinguish the works.
Reference must conform to the style of the Publication Manual of the APA 6th Edition. Start the reference with the sequence "Reference:" (without the quotes) in 10 point bold-face and leave 1 blank lines after "Reference".
Surname, initial name/s. (Year). Name et al. (Year), (Name, Year), (Name1 and Name2, Year), (Name, Year; Name, Year a,b; Name, Year1,year2), (Name et al., Year) References should be listed at the end of the paper in alphabetical order.
Articles in preparation or articles submitted for publication, unpublished observations, personal communications, etc. should not be included in the reference list but should only be mentioned in the article text. Journal names are abbreviated according to Chemical Abstracts. Authors are fully responsible for the accuracy of the references.
Bates, A. W. (2005). Technology, E-Learning and Distance Education. London: Routledge.
Chaudhary, S. V. S and Panda, S (2005). Educational Television and Teleconferencing. In Reddi, U.V., and Mishra, S. (Eds), Educational Media in Asia: Perspectives on Distance Education. Vencour: COL.
Short Communications Short Communications are limited to a maximum of two figures and one table. They should present a complete study that is more limited in scope than is found in full-length papers. The items of manuscript preparation listed above apply to Short Communications with the following differences:
Abstracts are limited to 100-150 words;
Instead of a separate Materials and Methods section, experimental procedures may be incorporated into Figure Legends and Table footnotes;
Results and Discussion should be combined into a single section.
Proofs and Reprints
Electronic proofs will be sent (e-mail attachment) to the corresponding author as a PDF file. Page proofs are considered to be the final version of the manuscript. With the exception of typographical or minor clarical errors, no changes will be made in the manuscript at the proof stage. Because JEGYS will be published freely online to attract a wide audience), authors will have free electronic access to the full text (in both HTML and PDF) of the article. Authors can freely download the PDF file from which they can print unlimited copies of their articles.
Citations in the Text should be:
Follow the author-date- page number format (see example 1).
If you are referring to an idea from another work but not directly quoting material, or making entire reference to an entire book, article or other work, only make reference to the author and year of publication (see example 2).
If there is no author to cite, such as when you are citing a web page that lists no author use an abbreviated version of the title of the page in quotation marks (see example 3).
Italicize the titles of longer words such as books, edited collections, movies, documentaries, or albums.
Put quotation marks around the titles of works such as journal articles, articles from edited collections, television shows and song titles.
If a work has two authors, cite both last names every time the reference in your text.
Indicate direct quotations of fewer than 40 words, enclose the quotation within double quotation marks (see example1).
Start the quotations longer than 40 words on a new line, indented five space from the left margin and omit quotation marks (see example 4).
If you are citing a work that has no author, no date, and no page numbers, use the first few words from the title, then the abbreviation n.d. (for "no date"), (see example 5).
If you are using a quotation that uses quotation marks as a short quotation, use single quotation marks to set off material that was originally enclosed in quotation marks. If you are using a quotation in block quote, use double quotation marks.
Personal communications, such as e-mail messages to you, private interviews that you conducted with another person should be referred to in text citations but not in reference list (see example 6).
She stated, "Students often had difficulty using APA style," (Jones, 1998, p.199), but she did not offer an explanations as to why. According to Jones (1998), "Students often had difficulty using APA style, especially when it was their first time" (p.199). Jones (1998) found "Students often had difficulty using APA style" (p.199); what implications does this have for teachers?
Jones (1998) compared student performance…
In a recent study of student performance (Jones, 1998), …
In 1998, Jones compared student performance…
A similar study was done of students learning to format research papers
("Using APA 6").
Jones 's 1993 study found the following: Students often had difficulty using APA style, especially when it was their first time citing sources. This difficulty could be attributed to the fact that many students failed to purchase a style manual or to ask their teacher for help. (p.199)
In another study of students and research decisions, it was discovered that students succeeded with tutoring ("Tutoring and APA," n.d.).
A. P. Smith also claimed that many of her students had difficulties with APA style (personal communication, November 3, 2002).
References should be placed on a different page.
Cite references in alphabetical order by first author‘ surname and then his/her name.
References by a single author precede multi-authored works by same first author, regardless of date
List works by the same author(s) in chronological order, beginning with the earliest date of publication. If author has two works in same year, place in alphabetical order by first significant word in title. These works should be lettered consecutively (e.g. 2004a, 2004b).
Use "&" instead of "and" when listing multiple authors of a single work
If no author is given for a particular source, begin with and alphabetize by using the title of the work, which will be listed in place of the author.
All lines after the first line of each entry in your reference list should be indented from the left margin.
When referring to any work that is not a journal, such as a book, article, or web page, capitalize only the first letter of the first word of a title and subtitle, the first word after a colon or a dash in the title and proper nouns. Do not capitalize the first letter of the second word in a hyphenated compound word.
Capitalize all major words in journal titles
Italicize titles of longer works such as books and journals.
Berndt, T. J. (1996). Exploring the effects of friendship quality on social development. In W. M. Bukowski, A. F. Newcomb, & W. W. Hartup, (Eds.), The company they keep: Friendship in childhood and adolescence. (pp. 346-365). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Berndt, T. J. (2002). Friendship quality and social development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 7-10.
Wegener, D. T., & Petty, R. E. (1994). Mood management across affective states: The hedonic contingency hypothesis. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 66, 1034-1048.
Wegener, D. T., & Petty, R. E. (1995), Flexible correction processes in social judgment: The role of naive theories in corrections for perceived bias. Journal of Personality & social Psychology, 68, 36-51.
Berndt, T. J. (1999). Friends' influence on students' adjustment to school. Educational Psychologist, 34, 15-28.
Berndt, T. J. & Keefe, K. (1995). Friends' influence on adolescents' adjustment to school. Child Development, 66, 1312-1329.
Wegener, D. T., Kerr, N. L., Fleming, M. A., & Petty, R. E. (2000). Flexible corrections of juror judgments: Implications for jury instructions. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 6, 629-654.
Wegener, D. T., Petty, R. E., & Klein, D. J. (1994). Effects of mood on high elaboration attitude change: The mediating role of likelihood judgments. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 25-43.
Berndt, T. J. (1981a). Age changes over time in prosocial intentions and behavior between friends. Development Psychology, 17, 408-416.
Berndt, T. J. (1981b). Effects of friendship on prosocial intentions and behavior. Child Development, 52, 636-643.
An article in a periodical (e.g., a journal, newspaper, or magazine)
Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (Year). Title of article. Title of periodical, volume number, pages.
A nonperiodical (e.g., book, report, brochure, or audiovisual media)
Author, A. A. (Year of publication). Title of work: Capital letter also for subtitle. Location: Publisher.
Part of a nonperiodical (e.g., a book chapter or an article in a collection)
Author, A. A., & Author, B. B. (Year of publication). Title of chapter. In A. Editor & B. Editor (Eds.), Title of book (pages of chapter). Location: Publisher.
Article in an Internet Periodical
Author, A. A., & Author, B. B. (Date of publication). Title of article. Title of journal, volume number (issue number if available). Retrieved month day, year, from http://Web address.
Nonperiodical Internet Document (e.g., a Web page report)
Author, A. A., & Author, B. B. (Date of publication). Title of article. Retrieved month date, year, from http: //Web address.
Part of Nonperiodical Internet Document
Author, A. A., & Author, B. B. (Date of publication). Title of article. In Title of book or larger document (chapter or section number). Retrieved from http://Web address.
Journal article, more than six authors
Harris, M., Karper, E., Stacks, G., Hoffman, D., DeNiro, R., Cruz, P., et al. (2001). Writing labs and the Hollywood connection. Journal of Film and Writing, 44(3),213- 245.
Work discussed in secondary source
Coltheart, M., Curtis, B., Atkins, P., & Haller, M. (1993). Models of reading aloud: Dual- route and parallel-distributed-processing approaches. Psychological Review, 100, 589-608. In Seidenberg and McClelland's study (as cited in Coltheart, Curtis, Atkins, & Haller, 1993), …
Magazine, Bulletin article, one author
Henry, W. A., III. (1990, April 9). Making the grade in today's schools. Time, 135, 28- 31.
Calfee, R. C., & Valencia, R. R. (1991). APA guide to preparing manuscripts for journal publication. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
An article or chapter of a book
O'Neil, J. M., & Egan, J. (1992). Men's and women's gender role journeys: Metaphor for healing, transition, and transformation. In B. R. Wainrib (Ed.), Gender issues across the life cycle (pp. 107-123). New York: Springer.
A government publication
National Institute of Mental Health. (1990). Clinical training in serious mental illness (DHHS Publication No. ADM 90-1679). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Research and Training Center on Independent Living. (1993).Guidelines for reporting and writing about people with disabilities (4th ed.) [Brochure]. Lawrence, KS: Author.
A book or article with no author or editor named
Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary (10th ed.) . (1993).Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster. New drug appears to sharply cut risk of death from heart failure. (1993, July 15). The Washington Post, p.A12
A translated work and/ or a republished work
Laplace, P.S. (1951). A philosophical essay on probabilities (F.W. Truscott & F. L. Emory, Trans.). New York: Dover. (Original work published 1814)
A review of a book, conference, workshop, database, etc.
Baumeister, R. F. (1993). Exposing the self-knowledge myth [Review of the book The self-knower: A hero under control]. Contemporary Psychology, 38, 466-467.
An entry in an encyclopedia
Bergmann, P. G. (1993). Relativity. In The new encyclopedia britannica (Vol, 26, pp. 501-508). Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica
A print journal or newspaper article retrieved from an online database
Smyth, A. M., Parker, A. L., & Pease, D. L. (2002). A study of enjoyment of peas. Journal of Abnormal Eating, 8(3). Retrieved February 20, 2003, from PsycARTICLES database.
An online journal article
Kenneth, I. A. (2000). A Buddhist response to the nature of human rights. Journal of Buddhist Ethics, 8(4). Retrieved February 20, 2001, from http://www.cac.psu.edu/jbe/twocont.html
Chapter or section of an online document
The Foundation for a Better World. (2000). Pollution and banana cream pie. In Great chefs cook with chlorofluorocarbons and carbon monoxide (Chap. 3). Retrieved July 13, 2001, from http://www.bamm.com/cream/pollution/bananas.htm
Message posted to an online newsgroup, from, workshop, or discussion group
Frook, B. D. (1999, July 23). New inventions in the cyberworld of toylandia [Msg 25]. Message posted http://groups.earthlink.com/forum/messages/0025.html Harris, M. (Producer), & Turley, M. J. (Director). (2002). Writing Labs: A History
Submission of a manuscript implies that the work described has not been published before (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, or thesis) that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere; that if and when the manuscript is accepted for publication, the authors agree to automatic transfer of the copyright to the JGEDC. Details are given in under copyright item too.
Fees and Charges
Authors are not required to pay any for a handling fee, for editing or something else.
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
(According to Elsevier policies)
The publication of an article in a peer reviewed journal is an essential fundamental in the development of a coherent and reputable network of knowledge and is the essential model for Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity (JGEDC). It is also a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. Therefore, it is crucial to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing including the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer and the publisher.
The Publisher and Editorial Board of the Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity (JGEDC) takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously. We recognize our responsibilities in all our policies and ethical guidelines.
The Publisher and Editorial Board also endeavor to contribute in establishing standards and policies that improve scientific communications, promote business ethics, and encourage continued, sustainable growth in the field of scholarly publishing. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
Duties of authors
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial opinion works should be clearly identified as such.
Data access and retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Editorial Board of the JGEDC check the submitted articles with IThenticate program.
Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
Acknowledgement of sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
Authorship of the paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and human or animal subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.
Duties of the Editorial Board
(According to Elsevier policies and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines)
The editor of a peer-reviewed Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity (JGEDC) 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. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
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
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. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
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). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.
Duties of Reviewers
(According to Elsevier policies and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines)
Contribution to editorial decisions
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. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method.
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.
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.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
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. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Note: Composed using the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit and in compliance with Elsevier recommendations