Editorial Process and Policies

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Author Etic

  • The author reports the research results fairly, clearly, precisely, accurately, thoroughly, and impartially.
  • The author makes a statement about the authenticity of the manuscript, saying that it is not being published or has not been published in any media. If duplication occurs, books can be deleted. Similar to Turnitin, we recommend less than 25%.
  • The author ensures that the sources of quotations in the literature are clear and complete with the help of Mendeley.
  • The author is fully responsible for the data and research writing. If verification is required from editors and reviewers, the author is willing to answer precisely and fairly.
  • The author ensures that the names listed in this book are based on the ideas and thoughts of each author and have been approved by the entire writing team.
  • The author revises and edits the manuscript on time for discipline and regular publication of the book. If not, the author is ready to bear the consequences, namely delays in book publication.
  • Authors uphold each other's copyright and privacy to avoid conflicts of interest. If there is a conflict of interest with other parties, the author must resolve it fairly and wisely.

Editor Ethic

  • The editor is neutral and non-discriminatory.
  • The editor reports the results of the selection and review of manuscripts clearly and accurately to the author based on accuracy, completeness, and clarity.
  • Editors communicate effectively and efficiently in the publishing process.
  • The editor distributes manuscripts to members of the editorial team and reviewers fairly based on their respective competencies.
  • Editors work professionally according to their duties and responsibilities.
  • The editor is fully responsible for the success of the book's publication.
  • Editors respect each other's copycopyrights privacy to avoid conflicts of interest.

Reviewer Ethic

  • Reviewers are fair, objective, impartial, independent, and only side with scientific truth.
  • Reviewers must be critical and professional in assessing a paper based on their expertise.
  • Reviewers work based on the principles of truth, novelty, and originality.
  • Reviewers work on time.
  • Reviewers respect each other's copyright and privacy to avoid conflicts of interest.

For further information regarding scientific publication ethics, please visit https://publicationethics.org/