Publication Ethics | DIAS Technology Review

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

(based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)

The journal, DIAS Technology Review- The International journal for Business & IT, follows the Legal and Ethical Guidelines for Editors, Publishers as well as Authors recommended at https://www.elsevier.com , COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers. We encourage the best standards of publication ethics and take all possible measures against publication malpractices

Duties of Editors

Objectivity and Independence

Editors are entrusted with the task of scrutinizing and reviewing the articles submitted by the authors for publication. They analyze the submitted manuscripts on the basis of their academic worth, i.e., their importance, originality, validity, clarity, value addition and the relevance to the journal’s scope. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication. The editor’s decisions related to editing are irrespective of nationality, ethnic origin, gender, philosophical orientation, religion, political or institutional affiliation of the contributing authors.

Privacy and Confidentiality

Editors and their team are committed not to reveal any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone except the corresponding author, reviewers and the publisher, as per requirement of publication process. They never use any information from a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ overt written consent. The manuscripts which have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers are screened and alienated by the members of editorial board.

Peer Review and Ethical Publication Decisions

It is the duty of editors to confirm that all the manuscripts submitted for publication, undergo the plagiarism check and peer-review process. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding at least two reviewers (expert in the field) to whom the manuscripts should be sent for blind peer review. The full names and affiliations of editorial board and reviewers of DIAS Technology Review- The International journal for Business & IT, have been given in the journal as well as on our website.

The decision about the publication of manuscripts in the journal is made by Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with his team. The validation of the work in question depends upon its importance to researchers and readers, comments of reviewers and compliance of legal requirements like copyright infringement and plagiarism. As per ethical concerns any act of unethical publishing behaviour is dealt seriously even if it is discovered years after publication. The editorial team is ready to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies, whenever needed. The contact information for the editorial office has been provided in the journal as well as on our website for the convenience of contributors.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions Peer review facilitates editors to make decisions regarding publication and communicating to authors for improvement in their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and knowledge dissemination. Our editorial board consists of eminent & distinguished experts of their field from all across the globe. The full names and affiliations of our august reviewers of DIAS Technology Review have been given in Heartiest Thanks to our Reviewers! in our journal. New reviewers are added to the list from time to time.

Promptness and Confidentiality

The review procedure generally takes two-three weeks’ time. Any invited referee who senses some constraint to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted by the Editor-in-Chief. Since the manuscripts received for review are confidential documents, these must be treated with utmost privacy and must not be shown to or discussed with others except authorized by the Editor-in-Chief. Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Standards of objectivity

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. Reviewers should not have any conflict of interest.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. 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.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards: 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. The article should be accurate, objective and comprehensive. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Data access and retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if required. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 5 years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subjectbased data repository), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not impede their release.
Originality and plagiarism: Authors should ensure that they have written and submitted only entirely original work. If they have used the work or words of others in their manuscript, it should be appropriately cited. Plagiarism of any form, like "picking up" another's study as one's own, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's research (without acknowledgement) comes under unethical publishing behaviour and is totally intolerable.

Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication Papers relating to fundamentally the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Hence, authors are advised not to submit a manuscript for consideration which has already been published in any other journal. Submission of a manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Authorship of the manuscript: Persons who meet the criteria mentioned below, are listed as authors in the manuscript being published as they take public responsibility for -
a. the content
b. contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study
c. drafting the manuscript or revising it as per suggestions by reviewers to make it more knowledgeable
d. approving the final version of the paper and agreeing to its submission for publication
e. making a copyright declaration.
Duties of the Publisher: Handling of unethical publishing behaviour

In a case of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with Editor in chief and his team, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of a corrigendum for errors, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, along with team of editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred.
Access to journal content: The publisher is committed to preserve the scholarly content sent for publication on his own digital archive. Its easy accessibility to the readers is ensured by the organization through uploading it on the web portal. All the issues of DIAS Technology Review- The International journal for Business & IT, as well as the Legal and Ethical Guidelines for Editors, Reviewers, Authors and Publishers are available at the website : www.dias.ac.in