Publication Ethics and Malpractice statement for the EAI conferences

EAI conferences are committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and publication malpractices. All this Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement is based, in large part,  on the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).

EAI strives to base its publication on ethical grounds, in particular reject any form of plagiarism, preserve confidentiality of submitted work, protect copyrights of published material, publish only original material, and provide a civil and efficient environment to support the publication process.

All articles in conference proceedings are peer-reviewed. English language is condition for abstracts and content in papers. Every conference has assigned specific ISSN number and has a regular publication.

 

EDITORS STANDARDS

1.    Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript.

2.    Editor can reject a paper without review if he deems the quality too low for the conference standards, is out of the conference's scope, or contains plagiarism, or multiple, duplicate, concurrent publication/simultaneous submission, or misappropriation, or allegations for research errors and fraud, research standards violations, Undisclosed conflicts of interest, Reviewer bias or competitive harmful acts by reviewers.

3.    The editor must ensure that manuscripts received are reviewed for their intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors.

4.    The editor must ensure that information in and regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.

5.    The editor of the articles will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own research without written consent of the author.

 

AUTHORS STANDARDS

1.    Authors should present an accurate account of their original research as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Manuscripts will follow the submission guidelines of the conference.

2.    Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work.

3.    Author should not submit the same manuscript to more than one conference proceedings concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same research in more than one conference proceedings.

4.    Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in research work.

5.    Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution should be listed as co-authors or clearly acknowledged.

6.    Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.

7.    If requested, authors should provide raw data related to their manuscript for editorial review and must retain such data for a period of three years after the publication.

8.    Sources of financial support, if any, must be clearly disclosed.

9.    If at any point of time, author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in submitted manuscript, the error or inaccuracy must be reported to the editor.

 

REVIEWERS STANDARDS

1.    Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information.

2.    Manuscript reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Any kind of similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration with any other published paper of which reviewer has personal knowledge of, must be brought to the editor's attention.

3.    Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should support their recommendation with concrete supporting arguments.

4.    In the event that a reviewer is not able to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time, he/she should make every reasonable effort to notify the Editor within 72 hours of receiving of the manuscript.

 
 

Social links