ISSN 2220-9085 (online)
ISSN 2412-3587 (print)

Code of Ethics

Our ethic statements are based on COPE's (Committee On Publication Ethics) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. The following is a summary of the guidelines, and for the complete statement, refer to the website (


All authors must follow the following rules. They are:

  1. The author must not submit a manuscript being under reviewed in another place for publication, nor submit the manuscript elsewhere while being under reviewed in IJNCAA. It is also inadequate to submit a manuscript which is profoundly the same research to other place of publication, except if it is a resubmitted manuscript which has been rejected or withdrawn from the previous publication.
  2. The manuscript must not been previously published or accepted for publication in another place, either as an entire book including chapters or a portion of a paragraph or exhibits, or a manuscript in another language.
  3. Authors are encouraged to cite works from previous issues of IJNCAA.
  4. If the manuscript contains resources which overlap with the previously published works, in press, or under deliberation for publication elsewhere, the author must cite this work in the manuscript.
  5. Authors must clearly cite their own former works and ideas. If exact statements appeared in the other work of the Author which are included in the manuscript, the sentence or paragraph should be put in quotation marks and properly cited in a way that does not compromise the double-blind review process.
  6. Authors should not submit a manuscript to IJNCAA that was previously submitted to IJNCAA, sent out for review and was rejected after review unless the author do major improvements and extension.
  7. The manuscript must be free from any kind of plagiarism, falsification, or fabrications. Also, Self-plagiarism is not acceptable in any case unless there is some strong reason. Also, authors should minimize recycling their previous writings. If recycling is inevitable, the author should reference the previous writings in the manuscript. Such self-referencing should be phrased discreetly to avoid compromising the double-blind review process.
  8. Authors should avoid any kind of conflicts of interest or the presence of conflicts of interest throughout the research process.
  9. IJNCAA impose a double-blind review process, wherein authors do not recognize the reviewers and vice versa. Authors should respect the confidentiality of the review process and should not reveal themselves to reviewers and vice versa. For example, the manuscript should not include any author's information such as name, email, website and affiliations.
  10. All co-authors of the research paper should have made significant contributions to the work and shared accountability for the results.
  11. The corresponding author who submits a manuscript to IJNCAA should keep all the co-authors of the submission process and the results of the reviewing.
  12. IJNCAA holds the copyright of all published articles. As such, authors should ask for consent to publish their article (or a selection from the article) elsewhere.
  1. Editors should give fair consideration to all manuscripts offered for publication, judging each on its merits without regard to country, race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author(s). An editor may, however, take into account relationships of a manuscript immediately under consideration to others previously or concurrently offered by the same author(s0). All manuscripts should be treated with reasonable time and speed.
  2. The sole responsibility for acceptance or rejection of a manuscript rests with the editor. Responsible and prudent exercise of this duty normally requires that the editor seek advice from reviewers, chosen for their expertise and good judgment, as to the quality and reliability of manuscripts submitted for publication. However, manuscripts may be rejected without external review if considered by the editors to be inappropriate for the journal. Such rejections may be based on the fact that the manuscript is out of the scope of the journal, to be of current or sufficiently broad interest, to provide adequate depth of content, to be written in acceptable English, or other reasons.
  3. The editor and members of the editor's staff should not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than those from whom professional advice is sought. (However, an editor who solicits, or otherwise arranges beforehand, the submission of manuscripts may need to disclose to a prospective author the fact that a relevant manuscript by another author has been received or is in preparation.) After a decision has been made about a manuscript, the editor and members of the editor's staff may disclose or publish manuscript titles and authors' names of papers that have been accepted for publication, but no more than that unless the author's permission has been obtained. If a decision has been made to reject a manuscript for ethical violations, the editor and members of the editor's staff may disclose the manuscript title and authors' names to other SDIWC journal editors.
  4. An editor should respect the intellectual independence of authors.
  5. Editorial responsibility and authority for any manuscript authored by an editor and submitted to the editor's journal should be delegated to some other qualified person, such as another editor of that journal or a member of its Editorial Advisory Board. Editorial consideration of the manuscript in any way or form by the author-editor would constitute a conflict of interest, and is therefore improper.
  6. Unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used in an editor's own research except with the consent of the author. However, if such information indicates that some of the editor's own research is unlikely to be profitable, the editor could ethically discontinue the work. When a manuscript is so closely related to the current or past research of an editor as to create a conflict of interest, the editor should arrange for some other qualified person to take editorial responsibility for that manuscript. In some cases, it may be appropriate to tell an author about the editor's research and plans in that area.
  7. If an editor is presented with convincing evidence that the main substance or conclusions of a report published in an editor's journal are erroneous, the editor should facilitate publication of an appropriate report pointing out the error and, if possible, correcting it. The report may be written by the person who discovered the error or by an original author.

The reviewers should implement the following rules.

  1. Treat the manuscript as confidential. The manuscript (or its existence) should not be shown to, disclosed to, or discussed with others, except in special cases, where specific scientific advice may be sought; in that event the editor must be informed and the identities of those consulted disclosed.
  2. To destroy/erase the manuscript and to inform the editor should they be unqualified to review the manuscript, or lack the time to review the manuscript, without undue delay.
  3. To judge the manuscript objectively and in a timely fashion. Referees should not make personal criticism in their reviews.
  4. To inform the editor if there is a conflict of interest (see Appendix A.1). Specifically, Referees should not review manuscripts authored or co-authored by a person with whom the referee has a close personal or professional relationship, if this relationship could be reasonably thought to bias the review.
  5. To alert the editor if a manuscript contains or appears to contain plagiarised material, falsified or manipulated data.
  6. To respect the intellectual independence of authors.
  7. To explain and support their judgements so that editors and authors may understand the basis of their comments, and to provide reference to published work, where appropriate.
  8. To inform the editor of any similarity between the submitted manuscript and another either published or under consideration by another journal.
  9. To ensure that all unpublished data, information, interpretation and discussion in a submitted article remain confidential and not to use reported work in unpublished, submitted articles for their own research.
  10. Not to retain or copy the submitted manuscript in any form; to comply with data protection regulations, as appropriate.
  11. To make known any conflicts of interest that might arise.

Publishing Ethics Issues

Monitoring/safeguarding publishing ethics by editorial board
Editors should actively seek the views of authors, readers, reviewers and editorial board members about ways of improving their journal's processes and should monitor the performance of peer reviewers and take steps to ensure this is of high quality. Editors should consult editorial board members periodically to gauge their opinions about the running of the journal, informing them of any changes to journal policies and identifying future challenges.

Guidelines for retracting articles

Journal editors should consider retracting a publication if:

  • They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error)
  • The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication)
  • It constitutes plagiarism
  • It reports unethical research

Maintain the integrity of the academic record
Editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.

Preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards
Research funders and sponsors should not be able to veto publication of findings that do not favour their product or position. Researchers should not enter agreements that permit the research sponsor to veto or control the publication of the findings (unless there are exceptional circumstances, such as research classified by governments because of security implications).

Always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed
If the author notices a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's responsibility to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor got notice from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, the author should collaborate accordingly in retracting or correcting the paper. Else, the author should provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

No plagiarism, no fraudulent data
Authors should consider the rules of publication that submitted paper should be original and has not been published elsewhere in any language. Paper should not be submitted to another publication at the same time unless the editors have agreed to co-publication, If so, it should be clear to readers that the paper is co-published. Preset copyright principles and rules must be applied. Authors should follow copyrights laws and conventions, tables, figures and equations should be reproduced with permission and  acknowledged, referenced and cited. Authors should inform editors if their prior work is submitted for publication elsewere, authors should adhere that multiple publications arising from a single research project is clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced. Beside that authors should acknowledge the original source, and should respect relevant copyright conventions and permission requirements. If in doubt, authors should seek permission from the original publisher before republishing any work.