Publication Ethics

03/14/2020 hakan

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Journal of the Black Sea / Mediterranean Environment is an international journal committed to provide a platform where standards of publication ethics are the major aspect of the editorial and peer-review process. The Editorial process for a manuscript consists of a review, blind and peer-reviewed, followed by editor’s decision to accept or decline the submission.

Journal of the Black Sea / Mediterranean Environment abides by the following principles defined by COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing specified by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The relevant duties and expectations of all parties involved in the publishing process including editors, reviewers, authors and others are required to adhere to the publication ethics guidelines and malpractice statements defined below.

Authors’ Ethical Responsibilities

  • Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, and it should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour are unacceptable.
  • Authors may be requested raw data on their framing of evaluation processes; in such a case authors should be ready to submit the expected data and information to the editorial board for at least five years.
  • Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from “passing off” another’s paper as the author’s own, 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 behaviour and is unacceptable.
  • The work submitted for publication must have not been published in another journal or submitted at the same time.
  • Corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list and verify that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.
  • Authors should disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if any).
  • Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.
  • If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animals, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement to this effect.
  • Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of “revisions necessary”, authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.
  • When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them either to correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.

 Referees’ Ethical Responsibilities

  • Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts.
  • The evaluation should be carried out on time and on the below ethical responsibility.
  • Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.
  • Referees should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.
  • Referees who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative referees can be arranged.

Editors’ Ethical Responsibilities

  • Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic value (importance, originality, validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Personal information about the articles is kept confidential.
  • Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, referees, potential referees, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
  • The editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers.
  • The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two referees who are experts in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the referees’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

Publisher’ Ethical Responsibilities

  • In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question.