Publisher’s Publication ethics and publication malpractice statement (external link to the publisher’s website)
These guidelines are developed in accordance with the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Ethical guidelines for journal editors
The Editor and the Editorial Board are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the Journal shall be published. They take all reasonable steps to ensure the quality of published manuscripts. The Editorial Board is guided by the policies of the Journal’s publisher and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be enforced regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. All manuscripts go through an anti-plagiarism software to make sure that the manuscript going into the peer review are free of an unduly high level of duplication.
Editors must give unbiased consideration to each manuscript submitted for consideration for publication and should judge each on its merits, without regard to race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author(s). All received manuscripts are subject to peer review. Manuscripts submitted for the section, “Dialogue with the standard setter” are usually reviewed by the Editor or an Associate Editor (single blind review). The Editor or Associate Editor will make the final decision about publications and assess the need for further revision. They can decide to utilize an expert in the field to make the decision. Research manuscripts are reviewed by two independent reviewers who are experts in the relevant area, according to a double-blind peer review procedure. The reviewers make a scientific assessment and a recommendation to the Editor. An Editor considers the manuscript and the reviewers’ comments before making a final decision either to accept, accept with revision or to reject a manuscript. The peer-review process is confidential; information or correspondence about a manuscript must not be shared with anyone outside of the peer review process.
When the Editor or an Editorial Board member are informed of, or discover, convincing evidence about a problem in a published article (i.e. errors/inaccuracy, undisclosed conflict of interest, plagiarism), the editorial board will promptly notify the corresponding author and the Publisher and will undertake the necessary actions to clarify the issue and, if necessary, retract the paper or publish an appropriate corrigendum or erratum.
No fee is required to publish in the Journal, as it is clearly stated on the Journal web site (https://frjournal.eu/journal/aims-and-scope/).
Subscription fee and pay-per-view fees are clearly stated on the Journal website (https://frjournal.eu/journal/browse-the-journal/).
The Publisher guarantees access to the published manuscripts even in the event a journal is no longer published.
Ethical guidelines for reviewers
Peer reviewers assist the editor in making editorial decisions, and through the editorial communications with the author, may also assist the author in improving the paper. Reviewers must agree to review only manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner. Moreover, they must refuse to review a manuscript where there is a possible conflict of interest, including any relationship with the author(s), that might potentially bias their review.
Reviewers must be objective in reviewing a manuscript. They must provide a constructive, comprehensive, evidenced, and appropriately substantiated peer review report while avoiding making statements in their report which might be construed as impugning the author’s reputation. If the manuscript is not clear because of missing analyses, the reviewer should comment and explain what additional analyses would clarify the manuscript.
They should express their views clearly with supporting arguments and appropriate references. Suggested references must be based on valid academic reasons. Reviewers must refrain from suggesting authors to include citations from their own or their associate’s work.
Reviewers must focus on the language style of the submitted manuscript to verify that it is written in a sound and clear manner, and give suggestions for changes that can improve clarity.
Reviewers must keep the peer review process confidential- information or correspondence about a manuscript should not be shared with anyone outside of the peer review process.
Reviewers can provide confidential, constructive comments to the editors. These comments are not a place for denigration.
Reviewers must contact the Editor if they come across any irregularities according to research and publication ethics. Reviewers should call any significant similarity between the manuscript under consideration and any published paper or submitted manuscripts of which they are aware to the Editor’s attention.
Ethical guidelines for authors
The Editor and the Editorial Board evaluate submissions on the understanding that they are the original work of the author(s). Any reference made in a manuscript or article to another person’s work or idea is expected to be credited appropriately. A complete list of all references cited by the author(s) should be provided an integral part of the manuscript.
Manuscripts submitted must not have been published as copyrighted material elsewhere. Manuscripts under review by the Journal should not be submitted for consideration by another publication as copyrighted material. By submitting a manuscript, the author(s) agree that, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, the exclusive right to use the article for any editorial exploitation, without limits and with every modality and technology, will be transferred to the Journal who will transfer it to the Publisher.
All persons who have made significant scientific or literary contributions to the manuscript should be named as co-authors. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to ensure that all authors that contributed to the manuscript are fairly acknowledged and that the published author list accurately reflects individual contributions.
Submitted manuscript must present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. The description of the methods used in the analysis is expected to provide enough information to allow the replication of the results. Authors must facilitate access to data sets described in the article. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Authors must disclose all sources of research funding, including direct and indirect financial support, supply of equipment, or materials.
Authors are expected to provide detailed information about all relevant financial interests and relationships or financial conflicts, particularly those present at the time the research was conducted and through publication, as well as other financial interests (such as patent applications in preparation), that represent potential future financial gain. Potential conflicts of interest include, but are not limited to, patent or stock ownership, membership on a company’s board of directors, membership of an advisory board or committee for a company, consultancy for a company, or receipt of speaker’s fees from a company.
Research reported in the paper must be conducted in an ethical and responsible manner, in full compliance with all relevant codes of experimentation and legislation. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.