Publication Ethics

General Statement The Journal of Smart Learning Media (JOSLEM) is dedicated to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against publication malpractice. This statement is based on the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. All parties involved in the act of publishing (editors, authors, reviewers, and the publisher) are expected to agree upon standards of ethical behavior.

1. Duties of Editors

  • Publication Decisions: The Chief Editor and Editorial Board are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions.

  • Fair Play: An editor evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

  • Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

  • Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

  • Plagiarism Check: The editor is responsible for ensuring the originality of the content. JOSLEM uses plagiarism detection software (e.g., Turnitin/iThenticate) to screen all submissions.

2. Duties of Reviewers

  • Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

  • Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.

  • Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

  • Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

  • Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

  • Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

3. Duties of Authors

  • Reporting Standards: Authors of reports of original research should 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. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.

  • Data Access and Retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data.

  • Originality and Plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

  • Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

  • Acknowledgement of Sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

  • Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.

  • Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

  • Fundamental Errors in Published Works: 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.

4. Handling of Unethical Behavior

  • Identification: Misconduct and unethical behavior may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone.

  • Investigation: The editor will conduct an initial investigation. If the evidence is convincing, the editor will consult with the Editorial Board.

  • Sanctions:

    • A formal warning to the author.

    • Retraction or withdrawal of the manuscript from the journal.

    • Imposition of a formal embargo on contributions from the individual for a defined period.

    • Reporting the case to a higher authority or the author's institution for further investigation and action.