Academy & Industry Research Collaboration Center (AIRCC)

Publication Ethics

AIRCC is committed to peer review integrity and practices the highest standards of ethical publishing across all AIRCC journals. We publish original research papers that has not been published nor under review elsewhere. AIRCC publication ethics encourages integrity in research and peer review process as outlined below and we prohibit any malpractices regarding publication. AIRCC uses Docloc tool to verify the originality of every submitted manuscript. AIRCC promotes new research and scientific applications in the field of Computer science & Engineering and allied fields. We provide high quality and flexible information solutions to researchers.

Ethical Guidelines for Authors

Fabrication/Falsification of data - Making up data or results and recording or reporting them is fabrication of data. Falsification of data is manipulating research materials, omitting/deletion/suppression of conflicting data without justification and this would cause mistrust and disgrace to scientific community.

Plagiarism - Using another person's ideas, language, graphs, pictures, results and experiments without giving credit to them. Without citing the source, copying even a single sentence from your own or another person's research paper leaded to plagiarism.

Unacceptable author contribution - Including authors who have not contributed to the research in the manuscript and excluding authors who have contributed to the research is unacceptable author contribution.

Citation Manipulation - Citing irrelevant articles that don't contribute to content of manuscript is a kind of scientific misconduct.

Concurrent submissions - It is submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. It is a waste of time of editors and peer reviewers, and can also damage the reputation of journals if published in more than place

Redundant publications - It primarily refers to publishing the same material/experiments more than once. Accountability- All authors whose names appear on the manuscript are equally held accountable for the content of a submitted manuscript or published paper.

Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

AIRCC journals are peer reviewed by two or three reviewers and the editor-in-chief makes the final decision. It is expected that Editors and reviewers during the review process should be principled, prompt, act with confidence, contribution to the final decision, acknowledge source, and stick to objectives and guidelines mentioned below

  • Reviewers should understand that the peer review process is confidential. The review process should not be shared with anyone outside the peer review process.
  • Reviewers clearly understand that review process should be unbiased and author deserves full credit for their work.
  • Reviewers should submit a comprehensive and substantial peer review report in a timely manner. If there is delay, it should be communicated to the editor.
  • Reviewers must communicate to the Editor-in Chief if the papers are plagiarized or published elsewhere.

Ethical Guidelines for Editors-in-Chief/Editorial Board Member

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision to publish the manuscript in the journal based on peer-reviewers comments. It is expected that Editors during the review process should be principled, prompt, act with confidence, contribution to the final decision, acknowledge source, and stick to objectives and guidelines mentioned below

  • Editors should understand that the peer review process is confidential. The review process should not be shared with anyone outside the peer review process.
  • Editors clearly understand that review process should be unbiased and author deserves full credit for their work.
  • Editor-in-Chief should discuss all matter regarding publication with the Editorial board members before making a final decision.
  • Editors should automatically reject manuscript that are inappropriate or out of scope of the journal.
  • Editors must investigate if they receive information that a manuscript is plagiarized, under consideration elsewhere or has already been published. If there is evidence that the manuscript has been plagiarized, under consideration elsewhere or has already been published, then the Editor-in-Chief should issue an erratum

Prohibited Author's List (PAL)

If there is a violation of any of the above said policies in any of the AIRCC journals, the manuscript will be rejected or removed. The author will be entered in the PAL database and prohibited to contribute for the next 3 years.

Suggestions

If you have any suggestions to improve the content of this document, please send those to secretary@airccse.org