A ‘code of conduct’ which outlines the desired behavior and obligations of members of the scientific profession is needed in the publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal. Such of a code of conduct attempts to optimize the advantages of science to society and the profession. The advancement of science necessitates the sharing of knowledge, even though this may sometimes forego any immediate personal advantage.
The publication of scientific research in journals is one of the fundamental ways in which MRABJ serves the Accounting and Business Communities. For this purpose, editors, reviewers, authors, and publishers have to maintain the high ethical standard relating to the publication of manuscripts in the MRABJ.
Editors have the following responsibilities:
- To decide which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. Editors are accountable and responsible for everything they publish.
- To decide to accept or reject a manuscript for publication with reference only to the manuscript’s importance, originality and clarity, and its relevance to the journal.
- To acknowledge receipt of submitted manuscripts and to ensure the fair, efficient and timely review process of submitted manuscripts.
- To assess manuscripts for the intellectual subject matter disregarding race, gender, religious belief, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
- To guarantee that submitted manuscripts are handled in confidential conduct, with no details being disclosed to anyone, with the exception of the reviewers, without the permission of the author, until a decision has been taken as to whether the manuscript is to be published.
- Not unveil any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone excluding the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
- Not to use for their research, work reported in unpublished submitted articles.
- To act in response to any suggestions of scientific misconduct or to convincing evidence that the main substance or conclusions of a published manuscript are mistaken, usually through consultation with the author. This may necessitate the publication of a formal withdrawal or amendment.
- To determine rationally responsive measures when ethical objections have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in association with the publisher (or society).
- Only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to conduct an appropriate evaluation and which they can assess promptly.
- Acknowledge that peer review is a reciprocal effort and undertake to conduct their fair share of reviewing and promptly.
- Be objective and constructive in their reviews, abstaining from being hostile and from making offensive personal remarks.
- Have a non-influenced review, neither by the author’s nationality, religious nor political beliefs’ of the author, gender nor other characteristics of the authors nor by commercial considerations.
- Treat any manuscripts received for review as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
- Not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage or to disadvantage or discredit others.
- Recognize relevant published work that has not been referred by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be completed by pertinent reference.
- State all possible conflicting interests, looking for the recommendation from the journal if they are hesitant whether something constitutes a relevant interest.
Authors have the following responsibilities:
- To present a report of the research that has been conducted in an ethical and responsible manner.
- To present their results, truthfully, and without fraudulent, misrepresentation or improper data manipulation.
- To provide, if needed, the unprocessed data in connection with a paper for editorial review.
- To ensure that the work they submitted is an original work. If the authors have used the work and words of others that this has been appropriately cited or referred. Plagiarism in all its forms comprises unethical publishing manners and is intolerable.
- To describe their methods clearly and explicitly so that their findings can be confirmed by others.
- Take collective responsibility for submitted and published work.
- The authorship of research publications should precisely reveal individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting.
- To disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
- To report without delay the journal editor or publisher if an author notices a major inaccuracy or erroneousness in his/her published work. He/she has to collaborate with the editor to withdraw or correct the paper.
- Define the relationship between publisher, editor and other parties in a contract.
- Respect privacy (for example, for research participants, for authors, for reviewers).
- Defend intellectual property and copyright.
- Promote editorial independence.
- Work with journal editors to:
- Regulate journal policies appropriately and aspire to meet those policies, particularly concerning: editorial independence; research ethics; authorship; clearness and honesty; peer review; appeals and complaints.
- Inform journal policies to authors, readers, reviewers.
- Evaluate journal policies periodically.
- Preserve the integrity of the academic record.
- Support the parties in charge of the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, assist in the resolution of these problems.
- Issue amendments, clarifications, and retractions.
- Publish content on a timely basis.