URF Publishers | Journals
Editors of scientific journals owe duties to the authors who contribute to the journal's content, the peer reviewers who provide feedback on manuscripts' suitability for publication, the journal's readers and the scientific community, the journal's owners/publishers, and the general public. Depending on the relationship between the editor and publisher for specific journals, some of the following roles and responsibilities may overlap. Editors must ensure the integrity of the published literature by publishing errata or corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern as soon as possible. The editor must adhere to the publisher's policy guidelines and carry out the duties entrusted to him or her with integrity.
Providing authors with guidelines for preparing and submitting manuscripts.
Outlining the Journal's authorship criteria policies.
Treating all authors with fairness, courtesy, objectivity, honesty, and transparency.
Developing and defining conflict-of-interest policies for all parties involved in the publication process, such as editors, staff (e.g., editorial and sales), authors, and reviewers.
Ensuring the confidentiality of each author's work.
Developing a system for efficient and timely peer review.
Making editorial decisions in a timely and effective manner, as well as communicating them in a clear and constructive manner.
Being aware that editors and/or referees may delay a manuscript for questionable reasons.
Creating clear guidelines for authors on acceptable practises for sharing experimental materials and information, especially those required to replicate the research, both before and after publication.
Clearly communicating all other editorial policies and standards.
To carry out their expected duties in a balanced, objective, and fair manner, without discrimination based on the authors' gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin.
Adopting and adhering to reasonable procedures in the event of ethical or conflict-related complaints, in accordance with the URF’s policies and procedures as appropriate. Authors should be given a reasonable amount of time to respond to any complaints. All complaints should be investigated, regardless of when the original publication was approved. Any documentation related to such complaints should be saved.
To contribute to the decision-making process and aid in the improvement of the published paper's quality by objectively and timely reviewing the manuscript.
Maintaining the confidentiality of any information provided by the editor or author. In addition, the manuscript should not be kept or copied.
Notify the editor of any previously published or submitted content that is substantially similar to the content under consideration.
Be aware of any potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative, or other relationships between the reviewer and author) and notify the editor, withdrawing their services for that manuscript as needed.
Without the Editor's prior permission, reviewers should not share any information from an assigned original copy with untouchables, nor should they save information from a distributed composition.
A reviewer with relevant expertise should complete the survey. Because it is assumed that the commentator will be an expert in the specific field, a reviewer with insufficient mastery should be cautious and may decline to participate in the process.
Reviewer comments should emphasise both the positive and negative aspects of the article, as well as areas for improvement. A reviewer should clearly explain and support their decision so that the Editors and Authors understand the statement of the remarks. The reviewer must ensure that a recently announced perception or contention is accompanied by an appropriate reference, and must notify the Editor as soon as possible if the person becomes aware of copy production. A commentator should not change the language of an article while commenting on it. The assigned reviewer's decision on each article should be made objectively and without regard for bias or individual perception.
The reviewer should be chosen solely on the basis of logical legitimacy, importance to the subject, and scope of the diary, rather than the creators' money, racial, ethnic origin, and so on.
The reviewer should limit the conflict of interest to the greatest extent possible. In such cases, the reviewer must notify the editor and explain the situation in detail.
The reviewer is obligated ethically to provide comments within the time frame specified and to respond to any questions raised by the editor, if any. Editors and Editorial Board members are responsible for maintaining the credibility of submitted work by publishing errata or changes, withdrawals, and expressions of concern as soon as possible. The editorial manager must follow the rules of the publisher's strategy and carry out the tasks assigned to them with integrity.
United Research Forum endorses the Committee on Publication Ethics' standards (COPE). When dealing with potential instances of misconduct, we follow its Best Practice Guidelines as well as its Code of Conduct. We expect our authors to adhere to publication ethics best practises, particularly when it comes to authorship, competing interests, adherence to research ethics guidelines, false or fabricated information, excess publication, plagiarism, manipulated figures, and dual submission.
If we find compelling evidence of misconduct, we will find a way to address the scientific record, which could include some corrections or withdrawal.
Any queries about the above should be routed to the editorial office at [email protected]
Keeping accurate records of data related to their submitted manuscript and supplying or providing access to these data upon reasonable request. Depositing data in a suitable repository or storage location for sharing and further use by others, as appropriate and as permitted by the employer, funding body, and others with an interest.
Confirm/assure that the submitted manuscript is not currently being considered or accepted for publication elsewhere. Where portions of the content overlap with previously published or submitted content, acknowledge and cite sources. A copy of any submitted manuscript containing overlapping or closely related content should also be provided to the editor.
To confirm that all of the work in the submitted manuscript is original, as well as to acknowledge and cite content copied from other sources. Any content derived from other sources must be reproduced with permission. Authors must ensure that any studies involving human or animal subjects follow national, local, and institutional laws and requirements, and that approval has been sought and obtained as needed. The express permission of human subjects should be obtained, and their privacy should be respected.
Declare any potential conflicts of interest (for example, if the author has a competing interest (real or apparent) that could be considered or viewed as exerting an undue influence on his or her duties at any stage during the publication process).
To notify the journal editor or publisher as soon as possible if a significant error is discovered in their publication. Furthermore, if necessary, one should collaborate with the editor and publisher to publish an erratum, addendum, corrigendum notice, or retract the paper.