Publication Ethics

Upholding Integrity in Interdisciplinary Applied Research

Our Policies

Publication Ethics AI in Research Article Processing Charges Peer Review Process Open Submission Open Access & Licensing Archiving & Management Corrections & Retractions Appeals & Complaints Conflict of Interest Plagiarism Editorial Research Integrity Copyright & Licensing

Quick Links

Author Guidelines Submit Manuscript Submission Questions

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

SOLAV Journal adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices. All editorial decisions, peer review procedures, and publication ethics follow COPE guidelines.

SOLAV Journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and academic integrity.

The journal follows the principles and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to ensure best practices in scholarly publishing.

All parties involved in the publication process -authors, editors, reviewers, and publishers- are expected to adhere to these ethical standards.

Authors' Responsibilities

Authors must ensure that their work is original and has not been published elsewhere
Proper citation of sources and acknowledgment of contributions is required
Plagiarism, data fabrication, and falsification are strictly prohibited
Any conflicts of interest must be disclosed

Editors' Responsibilities

Editors evaluate manuscripts based on academic merit and relevance to the journal's scope
Editorial decisions are made without regard to authors' institutional affiliations, geographic location, or career stage
Editorial decisions are made independently and without discrimination
Confidentiality of submitted manuscripts is maintained
Editors take reasonable steps to identify and prevent misconduct

Reviewers' Responsibilities

Reviewers provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations
Confidentiality of manuscripts is respected
Reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest

Handling of Misconduct

In cases of suspected misconduct, including plagiarism, redundant publication, or unethical research practices, SOLAV Journal follows COPE procedures for investigation and resolution. Appropriate actions may include manuscript rejection, correction, retraction, or notification of relevant institutions.

Reporting Misconduct

To report suspected ethical concerns or publication misconduct, contact our Ethics Committee at [email protected]. All reports are treated confidentially and investigated promptly following COPE guidelines.

Core Ethical Principles

These principles guide all participants in SOLAV's publication process.

Integrity

Honest, transparent conduct from research design through publication. No fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation.

Originality

Submission of original work with proper attribution. Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable.

Transparency

Transparency Clear disclosure of conflicts, funding, and contributions. Open data and methods are required unless ethical, legal, or privacy constraints prevent public sharing.

Fairness

Impartial, constructive peer review. Editorial decisions based on merit without discrimination.

Responsibility

Authors ensure accuracy; reviewers provide timely, constructive feedback; editors safeguard quality.

Respect

For research participants (ethical approvals), animals (welfare standards), and intellectual contributions.

Detailed Responsibilities

Originality & Plagiarism: Submit only original work with proper citation. Text recycling from own previous publications must be minimal and cited.
Multiple Submission: Do not submit the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously.
Authorship: Include only those who made significant contributions. All authors must approve the final version and accept responsibility for its content.
Disclosure & Conflicts: Disclose all financial, personal, or professional conflicts that could influence the work.
Data & Reproducibility: Maintain raw data for at least 5 years post-publication. Data must be deposited in a public repository unless exempted. Fabrication, falsification, or refusal to share data without valid justification is serious misconduct.
Ethical Approvals: For research involving humans or animals, provide evidence of ethical review. Independent researchers without institutional ethics committees may submit detailed ethical justification following international guidelines (Declaration of Helsinki, ARRIVE, etc.) or documentation from independent ethics review services.
Errors in Published Work: Promptly notify the journal of any significant errors for correction or retraction.

Confidentiality: Treat manuscripts as confidential documents. Do not discuss or use unpublished information. Reviewers must not discriminate based on authors' institutional status, geographic location, or career stage
Objectivity: Provide constructive, unbiased evaluations based on merit. No personal criticism of authors.
Timeliness: Respond promptly to review invitations and submit reviews within the agreed timeframe.
Conflict Disclosure: Decline review if you have conflicts of interest (personal, financial, intellectual).
Standards: Identify relevant published work not cited by authors. Alert editors to any ethical concerns (plagiarism, duplicate publication).

Fair Evaluation: Make decisions based on academic merit, free from discrimination.
Confidentiality: Protect reviewers' identities and treat manuscripts confidentially.
Conflict Management: Recuse themselves from decisions where they have conflicts.
Misconduct Handling: Investigate allegations of misconduct following COPE flowcharts, regardless of when discovered.
Engagement: Foster responsible peer review and provide guidance to reviewers.

Handling Misconduct & Concerns

SOLAV follows COPE guidelines when addressing ethical concerns. The process aims to be fair, confidential, and evidence-based.

Common Issues & Actions

Plagiarism/Text Recycling: Manuscript rejection; notification to authors' institutions for severe cases.
Data Fabrication/Falsification: Article retraction; institutional notification.
Authorship Disputes: Require resolution by involved parties before proceeding.
Duplicate Submission: Immediate rejection; possible embargo on future submissions.

COPE-Based Reporting Process

Email detailed concern to [email protected]
Initial assessment by Ethics Committee
Evidence gathering & confidential investigation
Decision & appropriate action following COPE guidelines
Notification to relevant parties

Good Faith Reporting

We encourage reporting of suspected misconduct. Reporters acting in good faith will not face retaliation, even if allegations are unproven. Malicious or false reports, however, are themselves a form of misconduct.