Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Article published in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential model for our journal "Dirassat Journal Economic Issue " in order to offer readers articles with the best possible quality, a set of principles of Publication Ethics and Malpractice, which are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, are stated by our journal board. We find it essential to approve expected ethical behavior standards regarding all publishing procedures (editors, authors, and reviewers). Dirassat Journal Economic Issue is devoted to better practices of publishing research and accepts the duties of satisfying the upcoming responsibilities.

 Duties of Editors  

Publication decisions

It is the editors’ responsibility to make sure all articles submitted for publication shall be peer-reviewed by two experts at a minimum. The decision of publication in our journal is up to the editor-in-chief based on the expertise of reviewers, suggestions, and comments from reviewers, researchers, and readers regarding legal requirements, plagiarism, and copyright infringement. The editor-in-chief has the right to consult with other editors or specialists in order to make the final publication decision.

 Fair play and editorial independence

Manuscripts sent for publication will be exclusively examined by editors to ensure their academic merit e.g. “clarity, importance, subject validity, and originality”, as well as in relation to the journal’s scope. Publishing in our journal is not affected by the author’s race, sexual orientation, ethnicity, citizenship, gender, religious belief, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation. Both the editorial content of the journal and the period of publication of that content are under the authority of the editor-in-chief.

 Confidentiality

Information or data regarding submitted manuscripts shall not be revealed to anyone with the exception of the corresponding author, designated reviewers, journal advisors if necessary, and the publisher.

 Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Editors and members of the editorial board will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors in editing the manuscript will be kept confidential and will not be used for their personal gain. Editors waive consideration of manuscripts where they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the articles; Instead, they ask another editorial board member to edit the manuscript.

 

 Duties of Reviewers

 

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer Review supports editors in making editorial decisions and can assist authors in improving their manuscripts through the editorial communication with authors. Peer review is an essential part of formal scientific communication and is at the heart of the scientific endeavor. DJEI shares the view of many that all scholars wishing to contribute to the scholarly process are required to contribute their fair share of peer review.

 Promptness

Any invited reviewer who does not feel qualified to review research described in a manuscript, or knows that immediate review will be impossible, should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

 Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they may not be shown or discussed with others unless authorized by the Editor-in-Chief (who would do so only in exceptional and particular circumstances). This also applies to invited reviewers who decline the invitation to review.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations clearly articulated with supporting arguments so that authors can use them to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement representing an observation, derivation, or argument reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the appropriate citation. A reviewer should also inform the editors of any material similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which he has personal knowledge.

 Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Any invited reviewer who has any conflicts of interest arising out of competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or affiliations with any of the authors, corporations, or institutions associated with the manuscript and the work described therein should promptly notify the editors to resolve their conflicts of interest Explain and decline the invitation to review so alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript may not be used in a reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review are to be kept confidential and may not be used for the reviewer's personal gain. This also applies to invited reviewers who decline the invitation to review.

 

Duties of Authors

 

Reporting standards 

Authors of original research should provide an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by a factual discussion of the work's significance. The manuscript should contain enough detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective, and comprehensive, while editorial "opinions" or perspectives should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors should ensure that they have written and submitted only completely original work, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that were influential in determining the nature of the work described in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" someone else's work as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing significant portions of someone else's work (without attribution), to claiming results from the research of others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is not acceptable.

 Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Submission/Publication

Articles describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or first publication. Therefore, authors should not submit a manuscript for review that has already been published in another journal. Submitting a manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is unethical publishing behavior and unacceptable.

 Data Access and Retention

Authors should retain raw data on their submitted article and make it available for editorial review upon request of the Editor-in-Chief.

 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other material conflicts of interest that could be construed to affect the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

 Authorship of the manuscript 

Only individuals who meet these authorship criteria should be credited as authors in the manuscript, as they must be able to assume public responsibility for the content: (i) significant contributions to conception, design, execution, data collection, or analysis/interpretation of having completed the studies; and (ii) drafted or critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content; and (iii) viewed and approved the final version of the paper and consented to its submission for publication. Any person who has made significant contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (e.g., technical assistance, writing and editorial assistance, general assistance) but does not meet the authorship criteria may not be credited as an author but should be included in the acknowledgments section after their written permission as received. The corresponding author should ensure that all eligible co-authors (as defined above) and no ineligible co-authors are included in the author list, and ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and approved its submission for publication.

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design (according to the template uploaded via the ASJP platform), conduct, and/or interpretation of the submitted study.

Acknowledgment of sources

Authors should ensure that they have given appropriate credit to the work of others, and should also cite publications that have had an impact in determining the nature of the work reported. Information obtained privately (from conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties) may not be used or passed on without the express written permission of the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as B. Review processes for manuscripts or grant proposals unless they have obtained the express written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.

 Peer review

Authors are obliged to take part in the peer review process and to cooperate fully Prompt response to editors' requests for raw data, explanations, and evidence Ethics Approval, Patient Consent, and Copyright Permissions. In case of a first Decision "Revisions are needed, authors should respond to reviewers' comments systematically, point by point, and promptly, revise and rewrite to submit their manuscript to the journal in a timely manner.

 Fundamental Errors in Published Works If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, It is their duty to notify the editors or editors of the journal promptly and to work with them to either correct or correct the paper in the form of an erratum withdraw the article. If the editorial team or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then the authors are obliged to do so promptly correct or retract the work or provide evidence to the editors of the journal correctness of the paper. Please see the policy for withdrawing or correcting articles and contact the editor-in-chief.

 

Duties of the publisher 

 

Handling of unethical publishing behavior

In the event of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or the publisher accepts plagiarism in close cooperation with the editors’ appropriate measures to clarify the situation and amend the article concerned. This includes promptly posting an erratum, clarification, or, in most cases in severe cases, the return of the affected work. The publisher together with Editors must take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where scientific misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to occur.

 Access to journal Content

The publisher is committed to permanent availability and preservation of scientific research and ensures accessibility through partnerships with organizations and the Maintenance of our own digital archive.