Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Northeast Journal of Complex Systems (NEJCS) is committed to upholding the best ethical practices in publication, error correction or retraction if necessary. Any form of plagiarism, unethical behavior or malpractice is completely unacceptable at NEJCS. Authors must certify that the contents of their manuscript are original, have not been previously published anywhere fully or partially, and are not currently being reviewed by any other journals. We, at NEJCS, believe that it is the responsibility of editors, authors, and reviewers to comply with the accepted ethical standards and guidelines. The following is a summary of the responsibilities of the editors, authors, and reviewers based on the COPE's 2011 guidelines for publication ethics:

  1. Duties of editors: The editorial board will decide whether to publish a piece after taking reviewers' suggestions into account. Editorial judgments are completely based on the intellectual merit of the text and are not influenced by the authors’ sex, gender, race, ethnicity, religion, citizenship and other demographic or personal characteristics. Information regarding the manuscript will be kept confidential and will not be disclosed to anyone other than corresponding author(s), editorial board, and reviewers. Editors have a responsibility to ensure that there are no conflicts of interest between authors and reviewers.
  2. Duties of authors: Authors should ensure that the ideas, methodologies, or the findings discussed in the manuscript are original, accurate and significant. Any sort of dishonesty, content overlap without the required citations and credits, and willful misinformation are all considered unethical behavior and are not accepted. The manuscript cannot be submitted simultaneously to more than one journal by the authors. It is also expected that the authorship should be limited to those (and include everyone) who have made a significant contribution in conceiving the study concepts, designing the work, implementing them, interpreting the results, and writing the report. Sources of financial supports or conflicts of interest, if any, must be reported. At any point of time, authors are required to notify the editorial board of any inaccuracy or substantial error they may have found.
  3. Duties of reviewers: Since reviewers' suggestions ultimately determine whether an article will be accepted, the review of the manuscript must be objective, and any opinions expressed must be supported by relevant evidence. A manuscript should be treated by reviewers as privileged confidential information that should only be shared with authorized parties. If a reviewer does not find her-/himself suitable to review the manuscript or is unable to do so in a timely fashion, it should be communicated to the editors as soon as possible. Reviewers are required to alert the editorial board if they discover any conflicts of interest with the authors.