Publication Ethics of Philosophiamundi Journal

To maintain the quality of manuscripts and avoid plagiarism in the publication process, the editorial board has developed a set of publication ethics. These ethics apply to authors, editors, the editorial board, and the chief editor, and they reference the Committee on Publication Ethics.

Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

Publication Decisions

Editors have full responsibility and authority to accept, reject, or request modifications to manuscripts based on review reports. They ensure all submitted manuscripts undergo peer review by at least two experts in the relevant field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which manuscripts will be published, based on the validity of the work, its importance to researchers and readers, reviewers' comments, and legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may consult with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Manuscript Review

Editors must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by reviewers for originality using appropriate software.

Fairness

Editors must ensure that every manuscript submitted to Philosophiamundi Journal undergoes a double-blind review based on intellectual content, regardless of the gender, race, religion, ethnicity, politics, nationality, or other attributes of the authors.

Confidentiality

Philosophiamundi Journal protects the confidentiality of all data and personal information related to the publication. Articles submitted are kept confidential from any parties not involved in the publication process.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors will not use unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts for their own research without written consent from the authors.

Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewers assist editors in making editorial decisions and may help authors improve their manuscripts through editor communication. Peer review is a crucial part of formal scientific communication and plays a central role in the scientific method. Reviewers should provide critical but constructive assessments of the submitted manuscripts, detailing reasonable objections and suggestions.

Timeliness

Reviewers are given a timeframe to review articles. If unable to meet the deadline, the article will be reassigned to another qualified reviewer.

Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review must be treated as confidential documents and not shown or discussed with others except as authorized by the editorial board.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts based on content, providing recommendations for improvement, and clearly stating their views supported by arguments. Review comments should be polite.

References

Reviewers should identify relevant works not cited by the authors. Any statement that observations, derivations, or arguments have been previously reported should be accompanied by relevant citations. Reviewers should also alert editors to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published papers they are aware of.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers should not use unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts for their own research without written consent from the authors. Confidential information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not agree to review manuscripts if there is a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties and Responsibilities of Authors

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research must present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Data should be represented accurately, and the paper should contain sufficient detail and references. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide raw data related to their manuscript for editorial review and must be prepared to provide public access to such data and retain it for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical and unacceptable. Authors must ensure their work is original and not under consideration elsewhere. Authors must obtain permission to reproduce any copyrighted material.

Multiple or Concurrent Publication

Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is unethical and unacceptable. Authors should not submit previously published papers to another journal.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must properly cite all sources that influenced their work. Any information obtained privately, such as in conversations or correspondence, must not be used without permission from the source. Proper acknowledgment of others' work is required.

Authorship

Authorship should be limited to those who have significantly contributed to the study. All co-authors should have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission.

Communication with Editors and Reviewers

Authors are expected to respond professionally and promptly to editorial and reviewer comments. If authors decide to withdraw their manuscript from the review process, they must promptly notify the editor.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

Authors must promptly notify the editor or publisher if a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work is discovered, cooperating with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, the author must promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence of the original paper's correctness.