Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

 

Publication Ethics

It is very important that the editors, authors, and reviewers of the Intelligent Methods In Engineering Sciences (IMIENS) (e-ISSN: 2979-9236) comply with publication ethics. Our journal publishes articles that comply with the rules set by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).

The publication processes of the IMIENS are based on producing, developing, and sharing knowledge evenhandedly within scientific methods. Refereed articles are studies that require scientific methods and they provide objectivity. All articles should be prepared to take into account the general ethical rules specified by COPE. Based on the recommendations made by COPE and general publication requirements, Authors, Reviewers, and Editors must adhere to given international standards. If the author(s) of the article is found to be using falsified and fabricated data, the institution where these authors work will be reported and the article will be rejected. Editorial members of the journal and/or reviewers reserve the right to ask the author(s) to provide the raw data used in the article.

Section A: Publication and Authorship

  • All submitted papers are subject to a double-blind peer-review process by international reviewers who are experts in the relevant area of the manuscript.
  • Reviewers evaluate submissions based on relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language.
  • Possible editorial decisions include: accept, minor revision, major revision, resubmit for review, or reject.
  • Authors invited to revise and resubmit are not guaranteed acceptance; the revised manuscript undergoes another round of review.
  • Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed under any circumstances.
  • Manuscript acceptance is constrained by adherence to legal and ethical standards, including those related to libel, copyright infringement, plagiarism, and ethical research practices.
  • Duplicate submissions or submissions under consideration elsewhere will result in immediate rejection and possible sanctions.
  • IMIENS uses plagiarism detection software (e.g., iThenticate) to screen submissions for originality before publication. Authors may be contacted for clarification or further action if issues are detected.

 

Section B: Authors' Responsibilities

  • Authors must certify that their submissions are original and have not been previously published or submitted to another journal.
  • Authors must avoid unethical practices such as ghost authorship, guest authorship, plagiarism, data fabrication, or figure manipulation.
  • The list of authors must only include individuals who have made substantial contributions to the research. Individuals who have made minor contributions should be acknowledged.
  • The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors approve the final manuscript and agree to its submission.
  • Authors are required to disclose any conflicts of interest and identify all funding sources.
  • For studies involving human or animal subjects:
    • Authors must provide Ethical Committee Approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or equivalent.
    • Informed consent from participants must be documented, and the study must comply with international guidelines such as the Helsinki Declaration.
  • Authors must provide access to raw data if requested by the editorial team during the review or post-publication stages.
  • Authors must include a statement of compliance with ethical standards on the title or method pages of the manuscript.
  • Authors must not attempt to change the author order or add/remove authors after submission without prior approval from the Editor-in-Chief (EIC).

 

Section C: Reviewers' Responsibilities

  • Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat all information in submitted manuscripts as confidential and privileged.
  • Objectivity: Reviews must be objective and constructive, avoiding personal criticism of the authors.
  • Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must decline to review manuscripts where conflicts of interest exist (e.g., competitive, collaborative, or personal relationships with authors).
  • Reviewers must identify and report any:
    • Missing references to relevant work.
    • Significant overlap or similarity between the manuscript under review and other published works.
  • Reviewers must evaluate submissions within the specified time frame and notify editors promptly if delays are anticipated.

 

Section D: Editors' Responsibilities

  • Decision-Making: Editors have full authority to accept, reject, or request revisions for submitted manuscripts.
  • Editors must ensure that decisions are based on the manuscript’s originality, relevance, clarity, and alignment with the journal’s scope.
  • Editors must ensure the quality and integrity of published content by enforcing ethical publication guidelines and ensuring adherence to COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) standards.
  • Impartiality: Editorial decisions must be free from bias or conflicts of interest.
  • Editors must:
    • Protect the anonymity of reviewers in the double-blind review process.
    • Address ethical concerns or misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, data manipulation) promptly and transparently.
    • Publish errata or retraction notices when errors or ethical violations are identified.
    • Provide clear guidelines for authors and reviewers on the journal’s policies and expectations.
  • Editors must organize regular training sessions or updates for the Editorial Board and reviewers on ethical practices and journal policies.

Post-Publication Corrections and Ethical Misconduct Handling

All post-publication correction requests are meticulously reviewed by the Editor and the Editorial Board to assess their necessity and appropriateness. In line with the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines, the assessment process considers the nature of the error, its potential impact on the manuscript, and the evidence provided to support the correction request. Where necessary, the Editor and the Editorial Board may seek input from authors, referees, or relevant subject-matter experts. If the correction request is deemed valid, the required amendments are implemented and reflected in the journal's archive.

In instances of alleged ethical misconduct reported by whistleblowers, the Editor and the Editorial Board adhere to the relevant COPE flowcharts to guide the investigation. For concerns raised on social media platforms regarding published articles, the Editorial Board follows COPE's recommendations for responding to whistleblowers. When reports of suspected misconduct are received from institutions, the Editorial Board collaborates with these institutions and considers any evidence presented. To ensure a thorough and efficient investigation, information may also be shared with Editors-in-Chief of other journals, adhering strictly to COPE's recommendations.

If ethical misconduct is confirmed, the Editor-in-Chief issues a formal retraction notice. This notice is published in the journal, and the record of the article is updated in all relevant indexes to indicate its retracted status. The retracted article remains accessible in the journal's archive but is prominently marked as withdrawn.

Appeals and Complaints

Appeals and complaints regarding decisions made by the journal should be submitted via email to editor@imiens.org. These submissions are reviewed by the Editor and the Editorial Board following COPE's directives and guidelines. The decision on the appeal or complaint is made based on a comprehensive evaluation of the issues raised.

Withdrawal Requests

Requests for article withdrawal should be submitted via email to editor@imiens.org. Authors must include a signed withdrawal form, endorsed by all co-authors, outlining the reasons for the request. The Editor and the Editorial Board review these applications carefully, basing their decisions on the justifications provided by the authors. If the request is approved, the article is withdrawn from the journal, and the authors are promptly informed. Authors are strongly advised not to submit the manuscript to another journal during the review process to avoid conflicts of interest or duplication.

Reporting Unethical Practices

Any concerns regarding unethical behavior involving authors, reviewers, or editors, or non-adherence to ethical guidelines in articles published in IMIENS, should be reported to editor@imiens.org. Such reports will be handled in strict accordance with the journal's ethical policies and COPE guidelines.