Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Academic ethics are fundamental principles of scientific study that serve as the foundation for scientists' and engineers' credibility. To preserve academic integrity and publish high-quality scientific publications, all participants in the publishing process must adhere to defined ethical norms, including authors, peer reviewers, editors, and publishers.
MECS Press commits to adopting the best standards for ethics, errors, and retractions in all of its journals. One of the editorial board's key responsibilities is to avoid publication malpractice. Any unethical action is unacceptable, and MECS Press has a zero-tolerance policy for plagiarism in any form.
MECS Press journals' ethics rules follow the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ECCRI). It is also guided by the core practices and policies outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Ethical Guidelines for Authors
• Authors should explain their work honestly and fairly. The data in the study should be accurate and reliable. The publication should provide enough material and references for others to duplicate the research. Fraudulent comments or claims that purposefully alter the truth are unethical and immoral.
• All submitted manuscripts must be original. If authors use the work and/or text of others, they must properly cite or mention it in their publication.
• Authors should avoid publishing almost identical research papers in many journals or significant publications. The practice of submitting the same work to many publications at the same time is unethical and undesirable.
• All research publications must properly cite the work of other authors. Authors should acknowledge and cite key articles that have had a significant impact on their research.
• If the research involves chemicals, techniques, or equipment that provide any unusual risks, the authors must clearly state these risks in the report.
• Research involving humans, animals, cell lines, field sampling, and potential biosafety hazards must be approved by appropriate authorities. For articles involving human subjects, an ethical statement should be included. This should confirm that all participants signed informed consent forms prior to participating in the research; the study protocol was approved by an ethics committee; and the project approval number was provided.
• Research involving vulnerable populations, informed and voluntary consent must be obtained before participation. They should be respected and cared for, with their privacy maintained, and there should be no discrimination or damage. The research should be undertaken on an equal basis. Open and upfront contact with parents or legal guardians is critical throughout the study process, particularly for research involving people under the age of 18. Use age-appropriate language and approaches, and acquire approval from the child and their legal guardians.
• Raw research data should be retained for an extended time after publication.
• All authors should disclose any financial or other material conflicts of interest in their papers that could influence the results or interpretation of the article. All project financing sources should be stated.
• If authors uncover substantial flaws or inaccuracies in their published work, they must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and collaborate with the editor to remedy the errors or retract the publication.
• Authors should make it known in their articles when they utilize artificial intelligence techniques, such as grammar checking or paraphrasing.
Ethical Guidelines for Editors
• Editors have complete responsibility and control over all manuscripts submitted for peer review and publication, and they can make editorial judgments.
• Editors should handle all authors with fairness, courtesy, objectivity, and honesty. All manuscripts should be evaluated objectively on the basis of their academic value, without regard for commercial or personal interests.
• Editors should not have a conflict of interest while rejecting or accepting manuscripts.
• When errors are found in a manuscript, editors should encourage the release of a correction or retraction statement.
• Editors must ensure that the peer-review process is fair, impartial, and timely. In most cases, at least two independent reviewers should evaluate each research article.
• Editors should ensure that reviewers remain anonymous.
• Editors are prohibited from disclosing any information about submitted articles before publication.
• Editors should collaborate with publishers to design, implement, and review procedures for dealing with ethical issues, allegations, or findings of wrongdoing by authors and other individuals involved in the peer review process.
• Editors should be alert to the risk of editors and/or reviewers delaying papers for suspicious or unusual reasons.
• The editor collaborates with the publisher to devise measures to ensure that manuscripts are published on time.
Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers
• Reviewers should follow the editor's specified standards for the scope, topic, and quality of the review.
• Reviewers should maintain confidentiality throughout the evaluation process.
• Reviewers should articulate their thoughts clearly and give supporting evidence, and their conclusions must be neutral and impartial.
• Reviewers should have no conflicts of interest with the research, authors, or research funders.
• Timeliness is critical. If a selected reviewer believes they are insufficiently qualified to conduct the review task or are unable to review in a timely way, they should notify the editor and resign from the peer review process for that manuscript.
• Reviewers should evaluate the paper's scientific value, originality, and breadth, make ideas for improvement, and recommend acceptance or rejection based on the editor's most relevant evaluation criteria.
• Reviewers should make comments to the editor, but the editor will make the final choice.
• Reviewers should give timely, comprehensive, constructive, and impartial assessments of the manuscript's scientific substance.
• Reviewers should find relevant published literature that has not previously been cited.
• Reviewers should avoid making personal comments or complaints. If a reviewer has a conflict of interest that may impair objective evaluation, they should refuse to examine the submission or notify the editor and inquire about the best solution.
• Reviewers should notify the journal editor of any ethical concerns uncovered during the manuscript evaluation process, such as violations of ethical norms for animal or human subjects or substantial parallels between published publications and the reviewed manuscript.
Authorship and Contributor Policy
Author Attribution
Authorship should be restricted to those who made substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Everyone who has made important contributions should be listed as co-authors. Other individuals who contributed to certain substantive areas of the study endeavor should be acknowledged as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all suitable co-authors are included in the manuscript, with no inappropriate co-authors, and that all co-authors have examined and approved the work's final version before submitting it for publication.
Author Attribution Changes
Before submitting, authors must ensure that the author list, corresponding author, and author order are correct. Once the work has been approved for publication, no changes to this material will be allowed.
Potential Conflicts of Interest
All authors, reviewers, and editorial board members must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may affect their work or their perspectives on it.
If any unreported conflicts of interest occur prior to or after publication, appropriate action will be taken in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) rules.
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest in submitted manuscripts (per COPE rules).
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest in published articles (per COPE rules).
We encourage authors to offer data and methodologies that back up their research findings.
• Data Sharing
Authors must submit raw data linked to their paper for editorial assessment and be willing to make this data publicly available if possible. Furthermore, authors should keep data for a reasonable duration following publication. Authors are also advised to include a declaration of data availability that specifies how and where the data can be accessed.
• Reproducibility
Manuscripts should include adequate methodological details to allow others to accurately duplicate the work.
All studies must follow ethical principles.
• Approval
For investigations involving human or animal participants, writers must provide proof received from the appropriate organizations.
• Compliance
Authors are responsible for following ethical guidelines throughout the research procedure.
• Whistleblowing
Any infringement of ethical norms should be reported to the editorial office right away.
To ensure the quality and trustworthiness of our publications, we ask authors to promptly report any errors discovered in published works.
• Error Reporting
If authors identify errors in their published papers, they should immediately report to the editorial office using the contact information listed on the journal's website. In most cases, the primary point of contact for such messages is the relevant author.
• Review Process
Once notified, the editor or an editorial office led by a selected person with relevant expertise will investigate the claimed error and any supporting data. Depending on the severity of the error, proposed corrections may require peer review.
• Correction Mechanism
The editor will choose the most appropriate remedial action. The editor may post errata for errors that have no bearing on the general conclusions or integrity of the article. Authors are responsible for creating errata, which must be approved by all co-authors before publication. Errata will be added to the original article.
• Errata
If problems that need to be corrected are detected during the publication process, the journal may publish errata. Errata will be linked to the article and will attempt to clarify any inaccuracies without impacting on the article's main research conclusions.
• Retraction
If significant flaws are uncovered, such as serious academic misconduct, plagiarism, or major errors that overturn the research conclusions, the journal may commence retraction proceedings. A retraction statement will be released, outlining the reasons for the retraction and providing readers with transparency. Articles that have been retracted will be removed from the journal's website.
Copyright Ownership
All publications are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits free use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, including commercial uses, as long as the original work is properly cited.
The authors maintain complete rights to their work. Upon approval, authors must sign an author agreement recognizing their right to publish the work and permitting MECS Press to do so. Additionally:
• Authors are free to publish enlarged versions of their manuscripts elsewhere, but they must acknowledge the original publication.
• Authors retain the right to disseminate their work in online repositories, internal technical reports, etc.
• MECS Press maintains the right to alter manuscripts to fit publication requirements.
• MECS Press does not pay author royalties.
Originality and Plagiarism
MECS Press journals maintain the highest level of academic integrity. Plagiarism, which is the misuse of another's ideas, procedures, results, or phrases without proper attribution, is absolutely prohibited. Authors must guarantee that all manuscripts are original and correctly cite all sources. The editorial board will employ Ithenticate (a plagiarism detection software) to identify plagiarism and has the right to reject articles that do not meet the originality requirements. Plagiarism may result in disciplinary action, including the withdrawal of published articles and notification to appropriate academic institutions.
Attribution and Citation
Authors must correctly attribute and cite all sources and references utilized in their work, including direct quotations, paraphrases, media resources, and data derived from other works. Proper citation is vital for maintaining research credibility and honoring original authors' intellectual property rights. Authors should follow the journal's citation standard and recognize all contributors to the manuscript. This publication encourages transparency in authorship and acknowledges funding sources, research assistants, and all other authors.
Intellectual Property Disputes
In the event of an intellectual property dispute, the editorial board shall thoroughly investigate the claims in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) rules. All sides will have an opportunity to present their perspectives. If necessary, the organization may seek counsel from outside specialists to resolve the conflict. Formal retraction, correction, or other relevant procedures may be implemented based on the findings of the investigation.
Research misconduct encompasses a variety of unethical acts that jeopardize the integrity of scientific study. The primary categories of research misconduct are:
• Plagiarism
Plagiarism is the unauthorized use or misappropriation of another person's work, ideas, or expressions without attribution.
When plagiarism is uncovered, authors might respond to the claims. Furthermore, a formal inquiry procedure is launched, with the editorial board and a review committee comprised of at least three senior reviewers collaboratively investigating the issue. The editorial board prioritizes the investigation of each plagiarism complaint and takes appropriate action.
If plagiarism is discovered in a published paper and confirmed, the following steps will be taken:
All other relevant authors have been notified of the incident.
The author's university has been alerted about the perpetrated act.
We will investigate to determine the level of each author's involvement in the misbehavior; only authors found to be involved will be blacklisted and barred from publishing any further content in the MECS Press.
The article will no longer be available online.
The article will be replaced by a retraction notice.
The editorial staff will request that other online indexing providers retract the article.
• Fabrication
Academic misconduct occurs when data, results, or procedures are fabricated and published as genuine knowledge. If any charges, complaints, or inquiries into fabrication arise, the publisher will contact the respective author and request an explanation. If the author is unable to provide a suitable explanation, the publisher will notify the author's institution or employer. This matter will be handled in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) principles.
• Falsification
Research misconduct occurs when researchers manipulate research materials, equipment, or methods, or modify or omit data to falsify research conclusions. These instances will be handled in accordance with the methods recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). For more information, please see the links below:
Pre-publication: Possible falsification of data in submitted publications.
Post-publication: Possible falsification of data in published articles.
Inappropriate image manipulation: Improper image processing in published articles.
• Self-plagiarism
The extensive reuse of previously published work without proper citation and subsequent release as new is considered self-plagiarism. Such situations will be addressed according to the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Possible duplicate publication in the submitted manuscript.
Suspected duplicate publication in previously published articles.
• Authorship Issues
Failure to acknowledge suitable contributors or mention individuals who do not meet authorship criteria is considered academic dishonesty. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) offers guidance in identifying potential authorship concerns. Once a paper has been accepted, authorship cannot be changed, including adding or removing authors, changing the corresponding author, or changing the order of the authors.
• Conflict of Interest
Failure to declare commercial or personal interests that could influence research outcomes creates a conflict of interest. All conflicts of interest will be handled in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines:
Reviewers suspect that submitted articles include undeclared conflicts of interest.
Readers suspect hidden conflicts of interest in published publications.
• Manipulation of Citations
This occurs when researchers selectively cite literature that supports their findings while omitting pertinent material that would contradict them. This generates a deceptive narrative and alters the research landscape. Furthermore, excessive self-citation, in which authors disproportionately cite their own previous research, exaggerates its influence and importance, jeopardizing the integrity of literature. If this happens, the author will have to provide a plausible explanation. The final decision will be taken on a case-by-case basis, following consultation with the editor.
• Violation of Research Ethics
Research ethics violations include failing to get informed permission from subjects, disregarding confidentiality, and exposing individuals to undue hazards. Adherence to ethical norms is critical for protecting the rights and well-being of study participants. Ethical issues will be resolved in accordance with the processes of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Journal Policy on Use of Generative AI
Generative AI can help with paper writing but should never replace it, and it should be used with caution.
This Policy on AI-Assisting Tools seeks to be open about how authors, readers, reviewers, and editors should approach Generative AI (henceforth GenAI) tools when writing papers for publication at MECS Press.
If you, the author, use GenAI tools for writing, they should only help you draft and improve your work, not perform core writing tasks on your behalf. Human authors should conduct tasks such as producing scientific ideas, drawing conclusions, and offering suggestions.
MECS Press hereby requests that:
Declare the use of GenAI tools in the paper. This declaration promotes confidence and transparency with readers while also ensuring adherence to the terms of use for these products.
Review and edit any AI-generated content. Copying and pasting generated content is not permitted because it could contain errors or biases. Finally, as the author of the manuscript, you are responsible for its substance.
Not listing AI tools as authors. MECS Press publishes creative works by human authors. Authorship implies responsibilities, such as ensuring accuracy and integrity, which AI Assistants cannot fulfill.
Any use of GenAI tools must be disclosed in the manuscript's dedicated section, if possible, and properly referenced in the original research papers.
MECS Press requires that all authors and editors follow these guidelines. Their violation will result in the removal of the published paper.
MECS Press editors use a double-blind peer review procedure and strictly adhere to ethical principles and standards to ensure the publication of high-quality scientific publications in the academic publishing sector. However, plagiarism, data fabrication, image manipulation, and improper authoring continue to occur on a regular basis. MECS Press editors take these ethical issues extremely seriously, are trained in related areas, and have a zero-tolerance policy for such incidents.
Our internal editors will look into any claims of publication misbehavior and, if necessary, contact the author's institution or funding agency. If proof of impropriety is discovered, we shall take appropriate action to rectify or retract the published article.
Appeals & Complaints
Readers who have queries or complaints regarding published papers should first contact the corresponding author to settle the matter directly before contacting the editorial office.
If contacting the author is improper, the author does not answer, or if the problem persists, the editorial office may be informed. The editorial office will work with the complainant, author, and editor-in-chief or editorial board members to investigate, address, or resolve any issues or complaints. Complaints, criticisms, or requests for updates on the academic legitimacy, ethical, or legal aspects of a work or the peer review process will be investigated further as needed. All complaints, comments, or requests for revisions about published articles are investigated by the editorial office, with the cooperation of the editorial board, and eventually authorized by the editor-in-chief. The editor-in-chief or a member of the editorial board makes the final decision on ethical concerns, with the editorial office assisting in ensuring compliance with the Committee on Publication Ethics' (COPE) key ethical standards. Other individuals and institutions, such as university officials or subject matter experts, will be consulted as needed. If a complaint concerns legal issues, legal representation may be obtained.
Personal comments and critiques will not be entertained. Every complaint, including anonymous ones, will be investigated. Complainers may request confidentiality from the editorial office. The editorial board, including the editor-in-chief, and other editorial members, will make every effort to accommodate this request to the fullest extent possible and in compliance with internal protocols.
The editor-in-chief or a member of the editorial board makes decisions on corrections, comments and responses, concerns, or retractions, and the authors are notified. All updates must follow our policy about updates to published works.
If a complaint is ruled unsubstantiated, further communication will be considered only if more material is supplied to support the concerns.
The complainant may not get updates on the investigation's status until a final decision is reached, but they will be notified if an update is published. The editorial office and board members are under no duty to offer additional information. Communication will be cut off if it is deemed unpleasant or disrespectful. Readers who have complaints or concerns should understand that investigations take time.
Revise published articles
• Minor errors
Minor errors that do not affect readability or meaning (e.g., spelling, grammatical, or whitespace issues) are ineligible for revisions, regardless of when or by whom they were introduced.
• Metadata errors
A correction request may be submitted if the editorial office considers it reasonable to amend inaccuracies in the paper's metadata (e.g., title, author names, institution). Once authorized, we will edit and republish the article on our website. Subsequently, we will contact all relevant indexing databases to guarantee that their versions have been updated.
• Corrections
Error correction requests can be submitted in the following conditions; however, a correction statement must be published concurrently: Errors that may influence scientific interpretation. For example: Errors in misleading sections discovered in otherwise reliable publications; errors in data or interpretation (not affecting the final conclusion); science-related formatting changes, such as missing or unclear figures; additions or deletions to the author list (including entire institutions); additions or deletions of references.
Once the change request is approved, we will update and republish the article on our website, along with a correction note. This correction notice is published separately and linked to the corrected publication; however, it appears in the most recent issue of the journal. The update is intended to inform all readers that the article has undergone significant revisions, and the corrected version is now available on the website. Once the update is complete, all relevant index databases will be contacted to ensure that their versions are likewise updated.
Retraction
Retraction will be considered if there is clear evidence that the research results are untrustworthy, whether due to academic misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honesty errors (e.g., calculation errors or experimental errors), or if the results were previously published elsewhere without proper cross-citation, permission, or attribution (i.e., duplicate publication), or if the paper constitutes plagiarism or reports unethical research.
The primary goal of retraction is to correct errors in literature and preserve their integrity, rather than to punish writers for misconduct.
Retracted articles will be deleted from the publisher's journal website. Separate information will be provided regarding the retracted paper, the cause for retraction, and the author who retracted it. MECS Press makes the final decision on retractions.
Complaints can be directed to integrity@mecs-press.org. We will handle the complaints right away.