Open Access Journal
Open access is an ongoing publication practice which differs in the way traditional methods of publishing papers to the public get submitted, reviewed, authenticated and finally published. In Open Access publication model neither readers nor a reader’s institution are charged for access to articles or other resources. Users are free to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles for any non-commercial purpose without requiring a subscription to the journal in which these articles are published.
JIETA follows the Open Access model. The publication cost should be covered by the author’s institution or research funds. These Open Access charges replace subscription charges and allow the JIETA to make the valuable published materials freely accessible to all interested online visitors, especially the researchers and young scholars from developing countries.
This ethical guideline proposes the ethics standards that the members, meaning the authors, reviewers, and editors, must follow to allow the Journal of Industrial Information Technology and Application to maintain a high level of ethics and continue contributing to the development of the International Society for Information Technology and Application. All members of the Journal of Industrial Information Technology and Application must adhere to the regulations stated in this guideline in the evaluation and publishing processes of this journal in order to secure fairness and the ethics of science and technology research.
1. Ethical Guidelines for Authors
The author of the submitted manuscript must adhere to the following ethical guidelines in composing and submitting manuscripts.
1) During the research process of the submitted paper, the author must follow international procedures that govern the ethics of experimentation regarding human rights, bioethics, and environmental protection.
2) In the submitted manuscript, the author must provide the research contents and its importance in an accurate and detailed manner, and never distort the research results in any way.
3) The submitted manuscript must include results with sufficient academic value and comprehensive arguments to support them. For manuscripts that assert similar conclusions to already published manuscripts must have sufficient academic value in the new arguments.
4) Dividing similar research into multiple manuscripts for submission devalues the value of the manuscript and must be avoided as much as possible.
5) When citing public academic materials, the sources must be cited in a clear manner. For materials obtained from non-public manuscripts, research plans, or through personal contacts, the author must obtain
the original author’s consent before citing them.
6) The author must include in the references of all important public literature that are deeply connected to or helpful in understanding the submitted manu-
script’s research, with the exception of common
knowledge. It is advisable to include any manuscripts that conflict with the author’s research results as well.
7) Being critical of another researcher’s research results in the manuscript is allowed, but personal criticism is not allowed.
8) It is not acceptable to use another researcher’s research results in part or as a whole without citation in the references in the manuscript, as such action is considered to be plagiarism.
9) The author cannot submit a manuscript that he/she has submitted or is planning to submit to another journal. Double-submission is considered to be a misconduct and not allowed.
10) All researchers that have made substantial contribution in the research process must be listed as co-authors and the corresponding author of the manuscript must have obtained permission from all authors regarding the author listing. All acknowledgment for non-academic aid such as administrative and financial support or supply of research materials and sim-
ple academic advice should be listed in the “postscript”.
11) Listing anyone who has made little or no academic contributions as a coauthor for nonacademic reasons is an unethical action that tarnishes the academic authority.
12) The order of co-authors should be determined under agreement of the co-authors, and it is advisable to place the person who took the lead in writing the manuscript at the front. The affiliation of the author should be the institution where the majority of their work was done.
13) If permissions are required related to copyrights, the author must gain approval before submitting the journal and confirm there will not be contract or ownership disputes from publishing the manuscript.
14) During the screening process of the submitted manuscript, the author must adhere to the regulations determined by the society and common internationalprinciples. Moreover, the author must accommodate the evaluation results from the editors and reviewers to put utmost effort to apply them to the manuscript.
If there are objections, the author may notify the assigned editor with evidence and reasons in detail.
15) If the publication of the manuscript has been ultimately denied, the author has the right to appeal the decision under clear and rational evidence to back up the appeal. However, it is not advisable to file an emotionally-driven appeal with weak or no evidence.
16) If an error is found after submission, the author must amend it, or withdraw their manuscript submission if the issue is serious.
2. Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers
Reviewers must review submitted manuscripts under the following ethical guidelines.
1) The reviewer must evaluate the manuscript in an objective and fair manner under consistent standards,
without regard to the author’s gender, age, race, affil-
iation, or personal relationship with them. The evaluation process should not involve any unproven personal academic belief or assumptions.
2) To ensure the confidentiality of the manuscript, any information obtained during the review process must not be revealed to others or used. Without consent of the author, even actions such as citing the contents presented in a submitted manuscript are not allowed.
3) The reviewer shall respect the intellectual independence of the author, and refrain from personal and subjective evaluation or using disrespectful expressions.
The reviewer must make an effort to compose an objective evaluation statement with an academically humble attitude. The review should be written in a mild tone as much as possible, and any feedback on
room for improvement in the author’s work should be
clearly stated along with relevant reasons.
4) It is not advisable to request additional data or explanation for personal interest of the reviewer.
5) If the reviewer finds that the manuscript contains contents contain public or similar information from other journals but do not provide a citation, then the reviewer must notify the editor with sufficient detail.
6) If a reviewer has a conflict of interest with the manuscript or feels they are inadequately qualified to review the submitted manuscript, they must report to the assigned editor immediately to allow selecting another reviewer. Moreover, it is advisable to notify the editor if the reviewer is unable to complete the evaluation within the given time period.
3. Ethical Guidelines for Editors
Editors must evaluate and proceed with judgment processes for the submitted manuscript under the following ethical guidelines.
1) The editor must provide fair and unbiased judgment and consideration of the manuscript without regard to
the author’s gender, age, race, affiliation, or personal
relationship with them.
2) The editor has the responsibility to determine re-evaluation or publication of the submitted manuscript based on the evaluation results using consistent criteria.
3) If the editor feels inadequately qualified for the sub-
mitted paper’s research field to provide an evaluation,
they may seek advice from another person of expertise.
4) The editor shall not present or use the information obtained during the evaluation process. Until the publication of the manuscript, its contents shall not be cited except with the consent of the author.
5) The editor has the responsibility to monitor for any unethical actions by the author and reviewer. If such actions are found, they must be reported immediately to the editor-in-chief. The editor must follow through with investigations and ensure appropriate disciplinary actions are taken.
6) If there is a conflict of interest with the submitted manuscript, the editor must notify another editor or the editor-in-chief to ensure another editor can handle the said manuscript.
7) If the editor cannot promptly process their responsi-
bilities then it is advisable to notify the society’s ex-
ecutive office, another editor, or the editor-in-chief.
8) If any unethical actions are found or there is an appeal on such action regarding the submitted manuscript or the evaluation process and the editor-in-chief has to judge the importance of the issue, then a judgment committee of 5-10 editors in the related field must be formed and the committee shall decide a disciplinary action to be taken based on the report and if an already published manuscript is involved, the publication of the manuscript can be retracted and cancelled.