Editors' Responsibilities

Editors are entrusted with the responsibility to uphold and advocate for the highest ethical standards within publishing practices. This commitment encompasses ensuring that every manuscript is assessed strictly on the basis of its scholarly merit, independent of any discriminatory factors or potential commercial gains. Such a principled approach is essential for preserving the integrity and fairness of the academic publishing process.

An integral part of maintaining the integrity of the review process is safeguarding the confidentiality of submissions. Editors must ensure that manuscripts are treated as confidential documents throughout the review process, protecting the intellectual property of the authors and the integrity of the review process itself.

Editors must take decisive action when faced with ethical concerns. Instances of suspected duplicate publication, fraud, plagiarism, or any form of unethical research practices require immediate and thorough investigation. It is the editor's duty to address these issues promptly to maintain the trust and credibility of the publication.

Fostering an environment of ethical compliance involves active engagement and collaboration with authors, reviewers, and the journal's editorial board. By working together, all parties can contribute to a culture of integrity and ethical adherence that underpins the journal's standards.

Moreover, it is crucial for editors to develop, implement, and regularly update policies related to the handling of ethical issues and complaints. These policies should be transparent, accessible, and enforced consistently, ensuring that all ethical concerns are addressed appropriately and in accordance with established guidelines. Regular review of these policies ensures that they remain relevant and effective in addressing the evolving challenges within academic publishing.

Reviewers' Responsibilities

Reviewers play a pivotal role in the editorial decision-making process by providing objective, constructive, and timely assessments of manuscripts. Their expert evaluations are essential for determining the suitability of a manuscript for publication, guiding both authors and editors through potential improvements. This constructive feedback is crucial for enhancing the quality and clarity of the research presented.

The confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and the integrity of the review process must be rigorously maintained by reviewers. This involves treating the manuscripts as confidential documents and not using the information obtained during the review process for personal advantage or sharing it with others before publication.

Reviewers should proactively identify and communicate any potential conflicts of interest to the journal that might influence their review. This includes any financial, personal, or professional relationships with the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the paper. Disclosing conflicts of interest ensures the review process remains impartial and fair.

It is also important for reviewers to adhere strictly to the review deadlines established by the journal. This timeliness is critical for maintaining the efficiency of the publication process. If unforeseen circumstances arise that prevent a reviewer from completing their review within the specified timeframe, they should notify the editor as soon as possible. This allows the editor to make necessary adjustments to the review timeline or seek alternative reviewers, thereby avoiding delays in the manuscript's editorial process.

Authors' Responsibilities

Authors are responsible for ensuring the originality of their submitted manuscripts, which includes properly citing all sources of data and materials. When necessary, authors must also secure permissions for the use of any copyrighted materials included in their submission. This practice upholds the integrity of the scholarly record and respects the intellectual property rights of others.

It is also the duty of authors to verify that their manuscript is not currently under review by another journal, nor has it been published previously. This requirement helps prevent the issues of duplicate publication and fragmentation of research findings, ensuring the novelty and contribution of each submission to the academic discourse.

EngiScience’s journal policies are confirmed as a case of duplicate publication, the following actions will be taken:
1. Retraction of the Manuscript: The article will be retracted from our journals to maintain the integrity of the academic record.
2. Notification to Affiliated Institutions: We will notify author(s) affiliated institutions about the breach of publication ethics.
3. Prohibition on Future Submissions: Author(s) will be prohibited from submitting new manuscripts to EngiScience journals for a period of ONE to FIVE years.

The duration for prohibiting an author from submitting to EngiScience journals due to ethical breaches, like duplicate publication, typically ranges from one to five years, depending on the severity of the violation and the journal's specific policies.

For a first-time offense involving duplicate publication, a common practice is to impose a ban of two to three years. This period is considered sufficient to convey the seriousness of the breach while also allowing the author time to reflect on the importance of ethical standards in scholarly publishing.

However, if the situation involves aggravating circumstances or if the author has a history of similar infractions, a longer ban, or even a permanent ban, may be warranted. It's important that the penalty also serve as a deterrent to prevent similar future infractions by others.

Authors must openly disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could be perceived as influencing their research. This disclosure includes any financial, personal, or professional relationships that might be construed as affecting the impartiality of the research findings. Transparent disclosure of conflicts of interest is crucial for maintaining trust in the research process and its outcomes.

The accurate representation of authorship and contributorship is fundamental, with all individuals who made a significant contribution to the work being properly acknowledged. Authors must confirm that everyone listed as an author meets the criteria for authorship and that all authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript for publication. This ensures accountability and credit are appropriately assigned.

Authors have an obligation to correct any significant errors in their work once they are identified. This may involve publishing corrections, retractions, or expressing concern about the validity of previously published work. Promptly addressing errors maintains the accuracy and reliability of the scholarly record and upholds the standards of academic integrity.

When research involves human participants or animals, authors are required to provide evidence of compliance with ethical standards. This includes demonstrating that informed consent was obtained from all participants or their guardians and that the research received approval from the appropriate ethics committees. Adhering to these ethical guidelines safeguards the welfare of research subjects and ensures the ethical integrity of the research.

Research Involving Human Subjects 

Authors must ensure that research involving human participants, tissues, or data complies with the 1975 Declaration of Helsinki, revised in 2013. Prior to conducting the study, approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or ethics committee is required, and a statement to this effect must be included in the manuscript.

An example of an ethical statement is: "This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, with approval from the Ethics Committee of XXX."

For non-interventional studies, ethical approval is also necessary, and participants must be fully informed about the study's purpose and data use. If ethical approval is not needed, authors should provide a justification or reference relevant regulations.

Written informed consent for publication must be obtained from participants if personal data or images are used. Case details and images that include identifiable information must be accompanied by a consent form, although signed forms should not be sent to the journal unless requested.

Studies involving vulnerable groups or categorizing participants by race, ethnicity, or other sensitive criteria must provide clear justification and may undergo additional scrutiny.

This summary emphasizes the importance of ethical compliance and informed consent in research involving human subjects.

Summary of Research Involving the Use of Animals

EngiScience requires that animal research offer significant benefits outweighing any harm, aligning with ethical expectations, and minimizing reader distress. Authors must adhere to the '3Rs' principle:

1. Replacement of animals with alternatives where possible,
2. Reduction in the number of animals used,
3. Refinement of procedures to lessen animal suffering.

Details on animal care, including housing, husbandry, and pain management, must be included in submissions. Authors are guided to consult specific resources for standards on animal housing and care, such as the Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals, the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science, and the European Animal Research Association.

Ethical approval from the appropriate committee is essential for studies involving vertebrates or higher invertebrates. The manuscript should detail the approval code, date, and ethics committee name. For clinical studies or those involving client-owned animals, informed consent from the owner is required, ensuring awareness of any risks and publication intentions.

In cases where ethical approval is not mandated by national law, authors should provide an exemption statement or justify the ethical basis of their research. EngiScience endorses the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting experiments involving live animals and expects adherence to these standards. Submissions may be rejected based on ethical concerns or if the scientific value does not justify the procedures.

EngiScience maintains the right to reject submissions that fail to meet ethical standards or lack sufficient justification.

Citation Policies

Authors are required to adhere to the following citation guidelines to maintain the integrity and transparency of their work:

1. Citation of Sources: Authors must clearly cite all sources of material, including their own previously published work, ensuring the original source is acknowledged. Where necessary, appropriate permissions should be obtained.
2. Use of Quotations: In line with COPE guidelines, any direct quotations from other researchers' work must be enclosed in quotation marks and accurately cited. This rule also applies to quotations from an author's own work.
3. Avoidance of Excessive Self-Citation: Authors should refrain from excessive citation of their own work to maintain the objectivity and credibility of their manuscript.
4. Objective Citation Practices: It is inappropriate to preferentially cite works by the author, their friends, peers, or affiliated institutions. Citation decisions should be based solely on the relevance and merit of the cited work.
5. Reading the Cited Work: Authors must not include references in their work if they have not read the cited material.
6. Prohibition of Advertisements: Citations should not include advertisements or advertorial material.
7. Discussion on Citation Manipulation: COPE has issued a discussion document addressing citation manipulation, offering recommendations for best practices which authors are expected to follow.

Adherence to these policies is essential to uphold the scholarly standards of publication and ensure the accuracy and fairness of citations within the academic community.