ERAU Journal Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Based on the guidelines provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (ERAU) Scholarly Commons (SC) has established the basic premise on which the journals published within the SC institutional repository should adhere to in regards to Ethics and Malpractice. The ethics and malpractice guidelines will be adhered to during the journal publishing process to include: the author(s), journal editor(s), peer reviewer(s) and the publisher. The COPE guidelines can be found here.
Questions and comments may be addressed to .
Duties of the Editorial Board
- Publication Decisions
The editor of the journal is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal will be published. The validation of the submitted work and its value to the research community must drive the editor’s decisions. The editor’s decision may be guided by policies set in place by that journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. - Fair Play
Editors should evaluate submissions based on their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political views of the author(s). - Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff may not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the submitting author(s), reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial staff, and the publisher, as appropriate. - Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished content in a submitted manuscript must not be used by the editor or editorial staff in their own personal research without written consent of the author. Information contained in an unpublished manuscript will remain confidential and must not be used by the editor or editorial staff for personal gain, without the prior written consent of the author(s).
Should an editor find themselves in a conflict of interest with a submitted manuscript, they should remove themselves from the oversight of that article and request another member from the editorial board to oversee and manage the decisions and publication workflow of that paper. - Cooperation in Investigations
An editor should take reasonable measures when ethical complaints arise in concerns with a submitted or published manuscript, in conjunction with the publisher. All reports of unethical publishing should be examined regardless of how long ago an article was published.
Duties of the Reviewers
- Contribution to Editorial Decisions
The peer review process assists the editor and editorial staff in making editorial and publishing decisions. This process also serves to assist the author(s) in improving their paper. All scholars who wish to contribute to a journal are encouraged to do their fair share of reviewing. - Timeliness
Any requested referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that a timely review is not possible should notify the editor as soon as possible and excuse themselves from the review process. - Confidentiality
Any manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. The article and its contents must not be shown to or discussed with anyone without express authorization by the editor. - Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author(s) is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. - Acknowledgment of Sources
All published work should be cited by the author(s) including an observation, derivation, or argument that has been previously reported. Relevant works not cited by the author should be pointed out by the reviewer. It is also the reviewer’s responsibility to call to the attention of the editor any substantial similarity or overlap between the submitted manuscript and any other published work of which the reviewer has knowledge. - Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s personal research without written permission of the author. Information contained in an unpublished manuscript will remain confidential and must not be used by the reviewer for personal gain.
Should a reviewer find themselves in a conflict of interest with a submitted manuscript, they should inform the editor and remove themselves from the review process of that article.
Duties of the Author(s)
- Reporting Standards
Authors of original research should present an accurate account of their work performed as well as objective discussion of its significance. Fundamental data should be presented accurately. Submissions should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate their work. Knowingly submitting inaccurate statements constitutes unethical behavior and is strictly prohibited. - Data Access and Retention
Authors should be prepared to offer public access to their data and be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. - Originality and Plagiarism
Authors should only submit manuscripts in which it is entirely original works. If they have used work and/or words of others, it must be properly cited or quoted. A repeated failure by an author to properly cite or quote other works shall result in the rejection of their submitted article.
Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is strictly prohibited. - Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in one or more journal or primary publication. Publishing the same manuscript in more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing and is strictly prohibited.
In rare cases there may be justification to publish a manuscript in more than one publication. Please discuss any needs of this sort with your editor and work out an agreement prior to a second publishing. - Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgement of the works of others must always be given. Authors should site publications that have been influential in determining the nature of their work. - Authorship of Paper
Authorship must be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made a significant contribution should be listed as co-authors. Others who have participated in substantive aspects of the research should be listed as contributors.
The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approve of the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. - Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be used to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support should be disclosed. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible. - Fundamental Errors in Published Works
In the event that an author discovers a significant error, discrepancy, or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is their (the author’s) responsibility to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with them to retract or correct the paper. Should the editor or publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, they should notify the author who is obligated to work with the editor and/or publisher to promptly retract or correct the paper, or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the paper.
