Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Global Vision Press (GV Press) is publishing electronic double-blind peer-reviewed international journals dedicated to following best practices on ethical matters, errors, retractions, and delivering the highest standards of publication ethics.

We uphold the best standard and take all possible measures against publication malpractices. All journals and conference articles not in accordance with Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement standards will be removed from the publication if malpractice is discovered at any time even after the publication. The Editorial Board is responsible for, among the other, for deciding which of the research papers/articles submitted to the journal should be published and preventing publication malpractice. Unethical behaviour is unacceptable and the Global Vision Press (GV Press) does not tolerate plagiarism in any form.

All the editors, authors, and reviewers, within the Global Vision Press（GV Press）agree upon standards of proper ethical behavior and accept the responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities, as set by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors (https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines).

1. Editors’ Responsibilities

1.1. Editorial Independence and Fair Play

Editors should strive to ensure that peer review at their journal is fair, unbiased, and timely.
Editors must ensure that all submissions are evaluated objectively and solely on the basis of academic merit, with no regard for the authors' ethnic origin, religious beliefs, race, sexual orientation, gender, citizenship, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation.

1.2. Publication Decisions

Editors should be accountable for everything published in their journals and strive to meet the needs of readers and authors. Editors' decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the editorial board's reviews and the paper's importance.
If the Journal publishes an article that criticizes a previous article published by the Journal, the Editors must give the previous article's author(s) an opportunity to respond to the criticism of their submission, provided that the author(s) response meets the Journal's review criteria.
1.3. Review of Manuscript
The editor ensures that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor, who may make use of appropriate means, to examine the originality of the contents of the manuscript and ensure the quality of the material they publish, recognizing that manuscripts and sections within manuscripts will have different aims and standards.

1.4. Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.

1.5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors should require reviewers to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission.

1.6. Potential Issues

Editors should require reviewers to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission.

The editors will answer to questions, ethical concerns, and malpractice complaints as soon as possible, and will make every effort to resolve the issues responsibly and adequately. Concerns, questions, and complaints about ethical concerns, malpractice complaints, or conflicts of interest can be sent to the editorial team at gvpress@gvpress.com.au and journal@gvpress.com.au

2. Authors’ Responsibilities

2.1. Authorship

Authorship of the submitted manuscript should be based on the following criteria:

  • Authorship should be limited only to those who have made a significant contribution to conceiving, designing, executing, and/or interpreting the submitted study. All those who have significantly contributed to the study should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should also ensure that all the authors and co-authors have seen and approved the final submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion as co-authors.
  • All authors undertake that their submission does not infringe on the copyright or any other rights of any third person, nor does it contain anything defamatory, slanderous, libellous, and obscene or any other unlawful content.  All authors agree that they shall be solely responsible in case of any legal violations.
  • Contributors who do not meet all the authorship criteria mentioned-above should not be listed as authors. However, they should be acknowledged and their contributions should be specified.
  • After submission, acceptance, or publishing, an author may seek the removal or addition of author(s). In this case, the author must provide a clear explanation for the change as well as a signed statement of agreement.
  • In the event of a disagreement over authorship, the Journal and its editors will not be held responsible for determining authorship or adjudicating such issues.

The corresponding author’s specific responsibilities include:

  • Correction and proofreading of manuscripts. Handling changes and re-submissions of revised papers until the manuscripts are accepted.
  • Acting on behalf of all co-authors in responding to post-publication requests from all sources, including issues about publishing ethics, content reuse, and the availability of data, materials, and resources.

2.2. Reporting Standards

Authors should precisely present their original research, as well as objectively discuss its significance. Manuscripts are to be edited in accordance with the submission guidelines of the journal.

  • Originality: Authors must certify that their work is entirely unique and original.
  • Redundancy: Authors should not concurrently submit papers describing essentially the same research. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
  • Acknowledgement of Sources:  Author(s) should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have influenced their research.
  • Data Access and Retention: Authors should retain raw data related to their submitted paper, and must provide it for editorial review, upon request of the editor.
  • Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her submitted manuscript, the author must immediately notify the editor.

2.3. Originality and Plagiarism

Plagiarism is unethical and unacceptable in all forms. By submitting a manuscript to the Journal, the author(s) guarantee that it is their original work, that it has not been plagiarized, and that it does not contain anything that infringes on copyright or other third-party rights.
If plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) was found or noticed from other sources, the editorial board should check the status. If the plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) was confirmed as an intentional thing.

  • This should be reported to editorial board and authors,
  • This should be sent to publisher published same or similar paper,
  • Paper will be removed according to the “Removal” part in section 6,
  • All authors' names will be marked as a blacklist, and these authors cannot submit any paper to all Global Vision Press (GV Press) journals for five years.

It is the author(s)' responsibility to acknowledge their sources and provide relevant references in the format specified. Without clear written consent from the concerned third party, any information gained through private sources (such as from discussion or communication with third parties) should not be used to include in the work.

3. Reviewers’ Responsibilities

3.1. Confidentiality

Manuscript reviewers, the editor, and the editorial staff must not disclose any information regarding submitted manuscripts. All submitted manuscripts are to be treated as privileged information. Editors should guide reviewers on everything that is expected of them including the need to handle submitted material in confidence.

3.2. Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

3.3. Standards of Objectivity

A review of submitted manuscripts will be conducted objectively. The reviewers shall express their views clearly, with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

3.4. Promptness:

If a reviewer believes him/her can't review the research reported in a manuscript within the designated guidelines, or within the stipulated time, he/she should notify the editor, so that the accurate and timely review can be ensured.

3.5. Conflict of Interest

All reviewers should have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors, and/or the funding bodies.

4. Publishers Responsibility

Publishers shall have the following duties:

4.1. Prompt and proper handling of unethical publishing behaviour

  • The publisher shall take reasonable actions to amend the work in question, in line with the editor's directions, upon notification by the editor(s) of any confirmed unethical behaviour or malpractice (s). This could include publishing clarifications, corrections, expressions of concern, apologies, or other relevant notes in the journal as soon as possible, or retracting the impugned work if it has already been published.
  • The publisher must work reasonably with the editor(s) to identify and prevent the publication of unpublished work(s) whose author has been found to have participated in unethical or malpractice behaviour.

5. Peer Reviewers

The duties and responsibilities of the Peer Reviewer have been laid down in the AJEMR Peer Review Process and Policy (https://gvpress.com/journals/AJEMR/prp.php).

6. Change or odification of published paper

6.1. Withdrawal

Papers published will be withdrawn if authors noticed significant errors. Before accepting a withdrawal request, the editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with authors sufficiently. If a paper were withdrawn,

  • Paper in journal database should be removed,
  • Link in the online publication site should be removed,
  • Next phrase or a similar phrase to announce the reason should be shown below the paper title in the online publication paper list: (This paper was withdrawn because of some technical errors).

6.2. Replacement

Papers published can be replaced if authors send an updated paper. Before accepting a replacement request, the editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with authors sufficiently, and at least three reviewers should check the advances. If a paper were replaced,

  • Paper in journal database should be replaced,
  • Link in online publication site should be replaced,
  •  Next phrase or a similar phrase to announce the reason should be shown below the paper title in the online publication paper list: (This paper was replaced because authors sent an updated version. Contact the editor if you want to check the old version).
  • Old version should be kept separately, and if someone wants to check the old version, the editor can send the PDF to him/her.
  • However, replacement is acceptable only one time, and only for technological advances.

6.3. Removal

Papers published will be removed if reviewers, readers, librarians, publishers, or other subjects noticed significant errors or plagiarism. Before removing a paper, the editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with authors sufficiently and should provide enough time to have authors' explanations. If a paper were withdrawn,

  • Paper in journal database should be removed,
  • Link in online publication site should be removed,
  • Next phrase or similar phrase to announce the reason should be shown below the paper title in online publication paper list: (This paper was removed because of plagiarism).

7. Penalties

7.1. Double Submission

If the double submission was found or noticed from other sources, the editorial board should check the status. If the double submission was confirmed as an intentional thing,

  • Review process will be terminated,
  • The reason should be sent to reviewers, editorial board and authors,
  • All authors' names will be marked as a blacklist, and these authors cannot submit any paper to all Global Vision Press (GV Press) journals for three years.

7.2. Double Publication

If a double publication was found or noticed from other sources, the editorial board should check the status. If the double publication was confirmed as an intentional thing,

  • This should be reported to the editorial board and authors,
  • This should be sent to publisher published same (or very similar) paper,
  • Paper will be removed according to the “Removal” part in section 6,
  • All authors' names will be marked as a blacklist, and these authors cannot submit any paper to all Global Vision Press (GV Press) journals for three years.