Statement of publication ethics
To maintain the high quality of publications in the ABAC Journal, we hereby are committed to the requirement that the following violations are strictly prohibited and sanctioned:
- Plagiarism of other works in all forms inclusive of self plagiarism
- Manuscripts and articles with data fabrication and falsification
- Articles that have been published elsewhere
- Manuscripts and articles with citation manipulation
Manuscripts under review, which violate one or more of these requirements, must be immediately rejected, and published articles found to contain any of these violations must be withdrawn from the journal.
If the author withdraws or sending a manuscript to other journals any time after the manuscript has been sent to peer review till the final decision, the Journal will charge the author a penalty fee for its time and resources spent. The authors must always pay the page charge even if the withdrawal is permitted.
Duties of authors
Original work: ABAC Journal expects all submitted manuscripts to be original contributions not previously published in any language or country (except as an abstract or preliminary report), and not to be under consideration for publication elsewhere. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one Journal is unethical and unacceptable. ABAC Journal uses Turnitin software to check for plagiarism and/or previous publication, and rejects articles that have substantial proportions of text that are copied from other sources.
Accuracy: Authors of papers that report original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. Conclusions should be based on the evidence presented in the paper.
Acknowledgment of sources: A research paper builds upon previously published work. Author(s) should acknowledge ideas and previously published results by citing these works in the paper and listing them in the references. Making statements of facts or ideas without citing evidence to back up these statements is not good research practice.
Disclosure of financial support and conflicts of interest: All financial support for the research and the paper writing process should be disclosed in the acknowledgments and any conflicts of interest should be stated.
Authorship: Each person listed as an Author should have participated sufficiently in the work, take public responsibility for the submitted manuscript, and agree to be accountable for all aspects related to its accuracy or integrity. This participation must include conception and design of the manuscript, data acquisition or data analysis and interpretation, drafting of the manuscript and/or revising it for critically important intellectual content, revision and final approval of the manuscript and statistical analysis, obtaining funding, administrative, technical, or material support, or supervision.
Any person(s) who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (i.e. technical help, writing/editing assistance) but does not meet the criteria for authorship should not be listed as an Author, but should instead be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgments" section, after their written permission to be named as been obtained. 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.
Duties of editors
Confidentiality: The editors of ABAC Journal use a "double-blind" peer review process where neither the authors nor the reviewers know each other's identity. The editors make all best efforts to protect the identity of author(s) and reviewers throughout the review process. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be quoted or referenced by an editor without the express written consent of the author. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Conflicts of interest: Editors recuse themselves from the review process when they have a conflict of interest or personal stake in the publication of a research work.
Objectivity: Decisions on publication are made objectively after reviewing the submitted manuscript and the peer reviews. The importance of the article's contribution to the existing research in its field, the quality of articulation of the argument, and the strength of the evidence provided are critical factors in the decision to publish.
Duties of reviewers
Confidentiality: Reviewers should respect the confidentiality of the review process. They should not discuss aspects of the work under review with other researchers until such time as the article is published. Unpublished materials disclosed in a manuscript under review must not be quoted or referenced by a reviewer without the express written consent of the author, requested through the editor. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Conflicts of interest: If the reviewer realizes, after receiving a manuscript for review, that he or she has been involved in the research described, knows the researchers involved in the research, or for any reason cannot give an objective review of the manuscript, the reviewer should inform the editors and decline the review. Conflicts of interest can include competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the paper under review.
Objectivity: Manuscripts should be reviewed objectively in the context of the reviewer's expertise in the field. The importance of the article's contribution to the existing research in its field, the quality of articulation of the argument, and the strength of the evidence provided are critical factors in reviewing the quality of a manuscript. Personal opinions without backing evidence should not be used as criteria for review decisions.
Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers should identify important relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. 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.