Publication Ethics

Journal of Computer Science and Cybernetics (JCC) applies the principles of publication ethics outlined in the COPE Core Practices. We take publishing ethics very seriously and accept our responsibility to maintain the integrity of the scientific record as much as possible.

Unbiased consideration is given to all manuscripts offered for publication regardless of the race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, political philosophy, sexual orientation, age or reputation of the authors.

In order to provide our readers with a research journal of high quality, Journal of Computer Science and Cybernetics is guided by the following principles:

Editors

  • The editor is responsible for maintaining the integrity of the academic record, for having processes in place to assure the quality of the material they publish and for precluding business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards.
  • JCC always recommend that Editor follow the rules of COPE CORE PRACTICE about Code of conduct and best practice guidelines for journal editors.
  • Editors' decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the remit of the journal. Each manuscript should be judged without regard to the race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors.
  • Articles may be rejected without review if the Editor considers the article obviously not suitable for publication.
  • The editor must not use privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review for personal gain or discredit others.
  • The editor ensures that appropriate reviewers are selected for submissions (i.e. individuals who are able to judge the work and are free from disqualifying competing interests).
  • The editor has systems in place to give authors the opportunity to make original research articles freely available.
  • The editor has systems to ensure that material submitted to their journal remains confidential while under review.
  • Using the singer-blind peer review system neither reviewers’ identities are revealed to the other party to ensure the quality of research published in the journal. There are at least two or more reviewers for the total number of articles in each issue.

Editor-in-chief

  • Running all the JCC's operations. Editor in-chief is fully responsible for the quality of the article, the process of publishing the article. Responsible for all steps of review processing, editing, online publishing of articles submitted to JCC; assign the Section Editor for taking steps to handle review process. Editor-in-chief makes the final decision of all submitted articles.

Deputy Editor-in-chief: 

  • Assisting Editor-in-chief in handling review process, editing, and publishing online; make the final decision with the status of the assigned articles. The Deputy Editor-in-chief manage manuscripts with content close with his/her specialty, supervise and handle problems arising in the manuscript process of Section Editor.

Section Editor:

  • Preliminary evaluating the quality of manuscript, can be rejected directly if manuscript is of low quality. Invite experts to evaluate and give comments for submitted manuscripts through submission system. Review the comments of referees to send the author comments to improve the quality of manuscript. Ask the author for the necessary explanations.

Reviewers

  • The reviewers assist the editors in taking the decision of publishing a submitted manuscript. By formulating suggestions to the authors, the reviewers can contribute to the improvement of submitted works.
  • Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
  • Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments, should not submit an inadequate or superficial review.
  • The reviewers should comment on the originality of submissions and should be alert to redundant publication and plagiarism.
  • The reviewers should declare any potential conflicts of interest and excuse themselves from involvement with any manuscript they feel they would not be able to review objectively or fairly.

Authors

  • The authors ensure that they have submitted original works, i.e., material that has neither been published elsewhere, nor is under review elsewhere, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
  • The authors ensure that all individuals named as authors have legitimate input into the work and manuscript and that everyone who was involved with the work and preparation of the manuscript is listed.
  • Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
  • Authors should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation.
  • Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal is considered as an unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
  • All authors should disclose in their manuscript relevant funding sources.
  • Authors are required to declare whether or not they have financial professional or personal interests from other parties or another conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript.
  • When an author founds error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to notify the journal editor and cooperate with him to retract or correct the paper.