Ethical standards are crucial to ensure high quality of scientific publications, credibility of scientific findings, and that authors receive credit for their work.
The reviews of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively, and the referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Furthermore, referees need to be aware that any information regarding the manuscripts they are reviewing should be treated as privileged information.
1. Author's responsibilities
1) In order to avoid ethical violations, Acta Prataculturae Sinica are committed to only publishing original material that was not published before.
2) Plagiarism means the use of any material and ideas developed or created by another person without acknowledging the original source. To avoid any form of plagiarism, each manuscript newly submitted to the Acta Prataculturae Sinica Office Editor (our online editorial support system) will be checked regarding plagiarism using AMLC (CNKI). The decision on whether a manuscript should be rejected because of fraud or should proceed to the peer-review process belongs to the handling editor.
3) It is unethical for authors to submit a manuscript to more than one journal at the same time, either within Academic Journals or any other journal. This includes the submission of manuscripts derived from the same data in such a manner that there are no substantial differences in the manuscripts. Duplicate submission also includes the submission of the same/similar manuscript in different languages to different journals.
4) All authors listed on a presented scientific work must have contributed to it. There’s no dispute in the author order, and the corresponding author should ensure that publication of the paper be authorized by the other authors. Alteration of the author order before publication should be consented by all authors to ensure the accuracy of all authors’ rights.
5) Funds information should be indicated in the manuscript. Support or aid for the publication of the work by persons having no author qualifications should be clearly stated in the acknowledgement.
2. Peer review/responsibility for the reviewers
1) Judgments should be objective and fair by the referee for the academic value.
2) Whether the paper can meet the publication standards should be clear and precise.
3) There is no conflict or relationship between the reviewers and the relevant research, the author, the fund project and so on.
4) Reviewers should point out that the manuscript should be quoted as the reference and not to be cited, and to ensure the correctness and the innovation of the manuscript.
5) The author and / or study sponsor reviewers should be kept confidential.
3. Editorial responsibilities
1) Editors should have no conflict of interest with respect to articles they reject or accept. Ensure the justice of review and reduce bias. Ensure the journal publication on time with schedule. Avoid publication with academic misconducts, including plagiarism/self-plagiarism.
2) When errors are found, promote publication of correction or retraction. Convey the experts’ review comments to the author timely. Coordinate academic discussions and communications between the author and reviewer.
3) Preserve anonymity of reviewers. A suitable and competent reviewers’ database should be established and maintained. Quality of reviewing tasks by reviews/editorial board members should truthfully recorded and evaluated.
4) Make recommendation (revision, rejection or acceptance) based on the merits, originality, and relevance of the paper. Meanwhile the author should be informed of the rights to make appeals after receiving the final decision.
4. Publishing ethics issues
1) Academic misconduct in any form (plagiarism, fraud, breached intellectual property rights, etc.) will not be tolerated by Acta Prataculturae Sinica.
2) Editors have a duty to act if they suspect misconduct.
3) If the claim is supported by evidence, the paper in question will be rejected for consideration in Acta Prataculturae Sinica and all authors and their affiliations will be informed.
4) In cases where the paper has already been published before the misconduct was discovered, a retraction by authors or by the Acta Prataculturae Sinica board will have to take place and the case will be made public.
Acta Prataculturae Sinica Journal will review and update this policy periodically.
