NIPES PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENT
(a) Decisions on Manuscripts
The editors in any of the NIPES Journal is responsible for decision made in publishing articles submitted to the Journal. The decision is often guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as may be in force regarding plagiarism, libel, copyright and infringement. The editor may confer with other editors, reviewers or seek legal advice in making this decision.
(b) Confidentiality Report
The editorial team do not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers and the publisher.
(c) Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Manuscripts that are unpublished are never used for editor’s own research without the express permission or written consent of the concerned author(s).
(d) Transparency and Fair play
The editor will evaluate any submitted manuscript for review and possible publication for their intellectual content. This will be done without regard to gender, race, belief, citizenship or any form of sentiments.
(e) Responsibilities of Reviewers
i. Standards of Reviews: Reviews of any submitted manuscripts are conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is not welcomed. Supporting arguments are used to clearly express any point of view.
ii. Contribution to Editorial Decisions: The peer review process helps the editor in making editorial decisions and also assist the author in improving the manuscript.
iii. Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unready or unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript is required to notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
iv. Acknowledgements: Reviewers may identify relevant published work that has not been cited or correctly cited by the authors. 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.
v. Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review is treated as confidential documents. They are never shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
vi. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
(f) Responsibilities of Authors
i. Originality and Plagiarism: As part of the peer-review process, manuscripts are checked online for plagiarism using plagiarism software i.e Turnitin. Maximum plagiarism allowed is 20% at a string of four (4) words, which excludes authors information and bibliography This plagiarism check is done even when minor corrections are made to manuscripts accepted for publication.
ii. Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research are required to present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Accurately representation of the underlying data in the paper is required.
iii. Acknowledgement of Sources: The work of others provided in a paper must be properly acknowledged. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work that is reported.
iv. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication: In general, an author should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and this is unacceptable.
v. Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper as appropriate.
vi. Contribution of Authorship to the Manuscript: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. In this sense, all those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors but not as co-authors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper. Furthermore, the corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
NIPES Journals statement of ethics are in line with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.