Publication Ethics Policy
Diamond Scientific Publishing adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices, which outline policies and principles that guide all parties throughout the publication process, including, but not limited to, authors, editors, and reviewers.
We strive to publish academic work of the highest quality that complies with the standards of integrity and ethics stipulated by the Core Practices of COPE. Below you will find further information on the individual principles and guidelines.
Editors: Duties and Responsibilities
Evaluations and publication decisions
Editors are responsible for evaluating the submitted articles and book proposals and making the decision on whether to assign them to reviewers and, if so, select the reviewers. The evaluation is based on such criteria as originality, relevancy, clarity, quality, and validity of the study. Editors must adhere to the legal requirements on copyright infringement, plagiarism, and libel when evaluating submissions.
Fair play
All submissions must be evaluated based entirely on the merits of the content, irrespective of the author’s race, religion, ethnicity, citizenship, sexual orientation, country of original, or political affiliation.
Confidentiality
Editors must keep all information about the submissions and their authors confidential and only share relevant information, when needed, with the author, assigned or potential reviewers, other editorial staff, and the publisher.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Information disclosed as part of the submission must not be used by editors for their own research or other purposes without the author(s)’s explicit permission.
Reviewers: Duties and Responsibilities
Contribution to editorial decisions
Reviewers evaluate the submissions assigned to them by the editorial staff, judging each submission based on such criteria as originality, relevancy, clarity, quality, and validity of the study.
Fair play
All submissions must be evaluated based entirely on the merits of the content, irrespective of the author(s)’s race, religion, ethnicity, citizenship, sexual orientation, country of original, or political affiliation.
Promptness
All submissions, unless discussed otherwise with the editorial staff, must be reviewed within 60 days. Should reviewers be unable to deliver within this timeline, they must notify the editor who assigned them the review and withdraw from the process.
Confidentiality
Reviewers must keep all information about the submissions and their authors confidential and share it only with the editor’s explicit permission.
Standards of objectivity
Reviewers must remain objective and independent in their evaluation and feedback processes. They should refrain from expressing personal views or criticism of the author and provide only constructive feedback related to the content.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify the missing citations and bring the author’s attention to it. Should reviewers suspect plagiarism or any other overlap and similarities with other works they have personal knowledge of, they should immediately notify editorial staff.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Information disclosed as part of the submission must not be used by reviewers for their own research or other purposes without the author(s)’s explicit permission. Furthermore, should reviewers identify conflict of interest that could potentially prevent them from objectively evaluating a submission, they should immediately disclose the conflict to their editor.
Authors: Duties and Responsibilities
Reporting standards
Authors should present a detailed explanation of the research methodology when including original findings in their submission. All data must be represented accurately. Any attempts to misrepresent data or make fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements will result in an automatic rejection of the submission and entitles editors to take actions in accordance with the guiding standards on ethics.
Originality, Plagiarism and Acknowledgement of sources
Authors are solely responsible for ensuring their submissions present original work and are free of plagiarism. All sources and publications that have been influential must be quoted and cited according in the American Psychological Association (APA) style. Authors cannot submit manuscripts or book proposals that have been published by a different publication or are currently under consideration by a different publication. Parallel submissions will lead to an automatic rejection. If an excerpt from the manuscript was published previously and it does not reveal the main findings of the study, the author must disclose this information when submitting the manuscript.
Authorship of a manuscript
In the event of multiple authors, authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the manuscript. All other participants should be listed in the Acknowledgment section. Authors should assign one author to be the corresponding author, who is responsible for ensuring that only appropriate co-authors are listed on the submission. All co-authors must agree to the submission of the manuscript prior to the submission.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Authors must disclose any sources of financial support or conflicts of interests during the submission process. Failure to do so will result in a rejection of the submission. Authors must disclose if human or animal subjects were used for research as well as if it involved hazardous chemicals, procedures, or equipment.
Reporting of errors
Authors must notify their editors should they discover any significant errors, inconsistencies, or inaccuracies in the published work within 30 days after the manuscript is published. Authors are solely responsible for identifying such errors.
Publisher’s confirmation
In the event of alleged misconduct, such as plagiarism, fraudulent claims, copyright infringement, etc., the publisher and the editorial staff reserve the right to take the necessary actions to investigate and rectify the situation, which includes, but is not limited to, publication of an erratum or retraction of the published manuscript.
Peer Review
All content published by Diamond Scientific Publishing undergoes a peer review process. Final papers are checked before publication to ensure adherence to its quality and formatting requirements.
Plagiarism
Plagiarism, misrepresentation of facts, and misrepresentation of data constitute unethical behavior. All ideas from other sources must be properly cited and referenced. This applies to own’s previous work.
Diamond Scientific Publishing has strict and non-negotiable anti-plagiarism policies. Its advisory and editorial boards believe in the sanctity of original work, and, as such, every submission is checked using a dedicated software by CrossRef Similarity Check, iThenticate. The index of the manuscript should not be more than 20% in any case.
In the event that plagiarism is detected, Diamond Scientific Publishing reserves the right to take the necessary actions in accordance with its ethical policies, including but not limited to the retraction of the manuscript.