Code of Ethics

 

 

- An editor should give impartial consideration to all manuscripts offered for publication, judging each on its merits without regard to race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author(s). However, an editor may take into account the relationships of a manuscript immediately under consideration to others previously or contemporaneously offered by the same author(s).

- An editor should consider manuscripts submitted for publication with all reasonable speed.

- The sole responsibility for accepting or rejecting a manuscript rests with the editor. Responsible and prudent exercise of this duty normally requires the editor to seek the advice of reviewers, chosen for their expertise and good judgment, as to the quality and reliability of manuscripts submitted for publication. Editors should communicate openly with authors and not provide comments under the guise of anonymous review. However, manuscripts may be rejected without external review if the editors consider them inappropriate for publication. Such rejections may be based on the fact that the manuscript does not fit the scope of the publisher, that it is of current interest or sufficiently broad, that it provides adequate depth of content, that it is written in an acceptable language (English, Portuguese, or Spanish), or other reasons.

- The editor and members of the editor's staff should not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than those from whom professional advice is sought. (However, an editor who solicits, or otherwise arranges in advance, manuscript submissions may need to disclose to a prospective author the fact that a relevant manuscript has been received or is in preparation from another author.) After a decision has been made on a manuscript, the editor and members of the editor's staff may disclose or publish manuscript titles and author names of papers that have been accepted for publication, but no more than that unless permission has been obtained from the author. If a decision has been made to reject a manuscript for ethical violations, the editor and members of the editor's staff may disclose the manuscript title and authors' names to other editors of publishers.

- An editor must respect the intellectual independence of the authors.

- Editorial responsibility and authority for any manuscript written by a Religation Press editor and submitted to this publisher should be delegated to another qualified person, such as another editor. Editors should also delegate to another qualified person manuscripts submitted by recent graduates (at least within the previous 5 years), by collaborators, or by colleagues at the same institution. Editorial consideration of such manuscripts in any manner or form would constitute a conflict of interest and is therefore inappropriate.

- Unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used in an editor's research except with the author's consent. However, if such information indicates that some of the publisher's research is likely to be unprofitable, the publisher may ethically discontinue the work. When a manuscript is so closely related to an editor's current or past research as to create a conflict of interest, the editor should arrange for another qualified person to take editorial responsibility for that manuscript. In some cases, it may be appropriate to tell an author about the editor's research and plans in that area.

- An author may request that the editor not use certain reviewers in consideration of a manuscript. However, the editor may decide to use one or more of these reviewers, if the editor believes that their opinions are important in the fair consideration of a manuscript. This could be the case, for example, when a manuscript disagrees with the previous work of a potential reviewer.

 

 

- An editor should give impartial consideration to all manuscripts offered for publication, judging each on its merits without regard to race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author(s). However, an editor may take into account the relationships of a manuscript immediately under consideration to others previously or contemporaneously offered by the same author(s).

- An editor should consider manuscripts submitted for publication with all reasonable speed.

- The sole responsibility for accepting or rejecting a manuscript rests with the editor. Responsible and prudent exercise of this duty normally requires the editor to seek the advice of reviewers, chosen for their expertise and good judgment, as to the quality and reliability of manuscripts submitted for publication. Editors should communicate openly with authors and not provide comments under the guise of anonymous review. However, manuscripts may be rejected without external review if the editors consider them inappropriate for publication. Such rejections may be based on the fact that the manuscript does not fit the scope of the publisher, that it is of current interest or sufficiently broad, that it provides adequate depth of content, that it is written in an acceptable language (English, Portuguese, or Spanish), or other reasons.

- The editor and members of the editor's staff should not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than those from whom professional advice is sought. (However, an editor who solicits, or otherwise arranges in advance, manuscript submissions may need to disclose to a prospective author the fact that a relevant manuscript has been received or is in preparation from another author.) After a decision has been made on a manuscript, the editor and members of the editor's staff may disclose or publish manuscript titles and author names of papers that have been accepted for publication, but no more than that unless permission has been obtained from the author. If a decision has been made to reject a manuscript for ethical violations, the editor and members of the editor's staff may disclose the manuscript title and authors' names to other editors of publishers.

- An editor must respect the intellectual independence of the authors.

- Editorial responsibility and authority for any manuscript written by a Religation Press editor and submitted to this publisher should be delegated to another qualified person, such as another editor. Editors should also delegate to another qualified person manuscripts submitted by recent graduates (at least within the previous 5 years), by collaborators, or by colleagues at the same institution. Editorial consideration of such manuscripts in any manner or form would constitute a conflict of interest and is therefore inappropriate.

- Unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used in an editor's research except with the author's consent. However, if such information indicates that some of the publisher's research is likely to be unprofitable, the publisher may ethically discontinue the work. When a manuscript is so closely related to an editor's current or past research as to create a conflict of interest, the editor should arrange for another qualified person to take editorial responsibility for that manuscript. In some cases, it may be appropriate to tell an author about the editor's research and plans in that area.

- An author may request that the editor not use certain reviewers in consideration of a manuscript. However, the editor may decide to use one or more of these reviewers, if the editor believes that their opinions are important in the fair consideration of a manuscript. This could be the case, for example, when a manuscript disagrees with the previous work of a potential reviewer.

Ethical obligations of authors
Authors are expected to adhere to the following ethical guidelines; violations may result in the application of sanctions by the editor(s), including, but not limited to, suspension or revocation of publication privileges.

- The central obligation of an author is to present an accurate and complete description of the research conducted, absolutely avoiding deception, including the data collected or used, as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the research. Data is defined as the information collected or used to generate research conclusions. The research report and data collected should contain sufficient detail and references to public sources of information to allow a trained professional to reproduce the experimental observations.
- An author should cite those publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported and that will guide the reader quickly to previous work that is essential to understanding the present research. Except in a review, citation of work that will not be mentioned in the reported research should be minimized. An author is obligated to conduct a literature search to find, and then cite, the original publications describing the closely related work. For critical materials used in the work, appropriate citation to sources must also be made when these were supplied by a non-author.
- When submitting a manuscript for publication, an author should inform the editor of related manuscripts that the author has under editorial consideration or in press. Copies of such manuscripts should be given to the editor, and the relationships of such manuscripts to the submitted manuscript should be indicated.
- It is inappropriate for an author to submit manuscripts describing essentially the same research to more than one publisher for primary publication, unless it is a resubmission of a manuscript rejected or withdrawn from publication.
- An author should identify the source of all information used, except that which is common knowledge. Information obtained privately, such as in conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties, should not be used or reported in the author's work without the explicit permission of the investigator with whom the information originated. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereed manuscripts or grant applications, should be treated similarly.
- Plagiarism is not acceptable at Religion Press. Publications adhere to the U.S. National Science Foundation's definition of plagiarism as "the appropriation of ideas, processes, results, or words of another person without giving proper credit" (45 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 689.1). Authors should not engage in plagiarism: verbatim or near-verbatim copying, or very close paraphrasing, of the text or results of another person's work. Authors should not engage in self-plagiarism (also known as duplicate publication): an unacceptably close replication of the author's previously published text or results without acknowledgment of the source.

Ethical Obligations of Manuscript Reviewers
- To the extent that manuscript review is an essential step in the publication process, and thus in the operation of the scientific method, every scientist has an obligation to do a fair share of the review.
- An elected reviewer who feels inadequately qualified to judge the research reported in a manuscript should immediately return it to the editor.
- A reviewer (or referee) of a manuscript should objectively judge the quality of the entire manuscript and the Supporting Information, with due regard for the maintenance of scientific and literary standards. A reviewer should respect the intellectual independence of the authors.
- A reviewer should be sensitive to the appearance of a conflict of interest when the manuscript under review is closely related to the reviewer's ongoing or published work. If in doubt, the reviewer should promptly return the manuscript without revision, advising the editor of the conflict of interest or bias. Alternatively, the reviewer may wish to provide a signed review indicating the reviewer's interest in the work, with the understanding that it may, at the editor's discretion, be conveyed to the author.
- A reviewer should not evaluate a manuscript written or coauthored by a person with whom the reviewer has a personal or professional connection if the relationship would bias the judgment of the manuscript.

- Confidentiality and anonymity of external reviewers are expected throughout the editorial review process in order to allow an honest discussion and evaluation regarding the scientific content submitted. Confidentiality of the manuscript: A reviewer should treat both the submitted manuscript and the data received from the publisher and its referee report and related correspondence as confidential documents. Such documents should not be disclosed or discussed with others, except, in special cases, when they are shared confidentially with individuals who can be called upon for specific advice. In such cases, the identities of those to be consulted should be disclosed to the editor in advance. Reviewer and reviewer confidentiality: Under no circumstances should the reviewer identify him/herself as the reviewer of a specific manuscript. In addition, the reviewer may not disclose the content of the submitted review to any individual or organization. This expectation of confidentiality and anonymity of peer review extends beyond the publication or rejection of the submitted manuscript.