Best Publishing Practices

1

The journal NEYART is committed to ensuring the academic integrity and scientific quality of its published content. To this end, it adheres to the principles of transparency and best practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All parties involved in the editorial process (editors, authors, and reviewers) must adhere to the following guidelines:

Authors’ Obligations and Responsibilities

Authors submitting manuscripts to NEYART assume the following commitments:

  • Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must guarantee that the work is original, that it does not contain excerpts from other authors’ works or from their own previously published works without proper citation. Plagiarism in all its forms is considered unethical conduct and results in the immediate rejection of the manuscript.
  • Simultaneous Submission: Multiple or simultaneous submissions are not permitted. Authors must declare that the article has not been previously published and is not currently under review by another journal or publishing body.
  • Manuscript Authorship: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant intellectual contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All co-authors must have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.
  • Funding Sources: Any financial or institutional support that facilitated the research must be explicitly declared.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

The peer review process is fundamental to scientific quality. Reviewers agree to:

  • Confidentiality: Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. It must not be shown or discussed with third parties without the editor’s authorization.
  • Objectivity and Rigor: Criticisms must be objective, constructive, and supported by clear scientific arguments. Personal judgments or subjective attacks against the authors are prohibited.
  • Timeliness: If a reviewer does not feel qualified to evaluate the research or cannot meet the established deadlines, they must immediately notify the editorial team so that a new assignment can be made.
  • Detection of Misconduct: The reviewer must alert the editor to any suspicion of plagiarism, substantial similarity with other published works, or data manipulation.

Protocols for Handling Conflicts of Interest

To ensure impartiality in the editorial process, the following measures are established:

  • Mandatory Disclosure: All authors must disclose, at the time of submission, any personal, financial, or professional relationship that could be interpreted as an inappropriate influence on the results of their research.
  • Recusal of Reviewers: Reviewers must decline to evaluate a manuscript if there is a conflict of interest arising from a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship with the authors or institutions associated with the work.
  • Editorial Transparency: If a member of the editorial board submits an article to the journal, it will be handled by an external editor or one unrelated to the author to avoid any bias in the final decision.
  • Handling Conflicts: If an undeclared conflict is identified after publication, the journal will follow COPE’s flowcharts for correction, retraction, or publication of a clarification note, as appropriate.