Publication Ethics Policy
Purpose And Scope
The purpose of our guidelines is to bring together best practice guidelines from leading organizations around the world to support all stakeholders involved in HATASO Publishing & Editing Services. The HATASO Guidelines have been developed for societies, editors, authors, reviewers, students and funders for the transparency and quality of research publications.
Publication Ethics And Honesty
HATASO journals strive to maintain the highest levels of trust in the content they publish. To maintain high ethical standards in publishing, we always strive to work closely with journal editors, authors and reviewers. The HATASO Journals’ Ethics Statement is based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE - https://www.publicationethics.org) Code of Conduct Guidelines. It is committed to applying ethics in dealing with misconduct in publications and investigating allegations of misconduct to ensure the reliability of research. The HATASO medical journals follow the guidelines of the International Committee for Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) https://www.icmje.org/
What Should I Do If My Submitted Manuscript Has Ethical Issues? https://publicationethics.org/files/u2/06_Ethics_Submitted.pdf
Research Integrity
Misconduct
Members of the HATASO Journals Publishing Team are not responsible for data falsification, forgery, plagiarism, image manipulation, unethical research, biased reporting, abuse of authorship, or redundant or duplicate publication on the part of the authors. It plays an important role in dealing with potential instances of conflict. Please follow the research misconduct guidelines of COPE.
Manipulation, Counterfeiting, And Image Re-Processing
HATASO provides information on image processing and, if necessary, checks the image. The author can be asked to indicate where the manipulation took place. HATASO requests that authors not enhance, obscure, remove, move, or insert specific features within images.
https://publicationethics.org/files/Image_Manipulation_in_a_Published_Article.pdf
https://publicationethics.org/node/19726
https://publicationethics.org/node/34626
Suspected Falsified Data In The Submitted Manuscript https://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Flowchart%20Fabricated%20A%20revised%20May%202011.pdf
Suspected Falsification Of Published Articles
https://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Flowchart%20Fabricated%20B%20revised.pdf
How COPE Handles Complaints Against Editors https://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Flowchart%20Complaints%20revised%20Apr%2012.pdf
Whistleblowing
Detailed evidence should be properly reviewed, whether collected covertly or by named "whistleblowers". COPE has a policy that editors respond to communications from whistleblowers.
Duplicate Publication
HATASO has a way to detect simultaneous or multiple posts. HATASO editors use mechanisms as part of their editing system to check for duplicates. If multiple submissions are confirmed, the editor will work with HATASO and refer to the COPE flow chart for duplicate publication of submitted manuscripts. Dual publication of an article is generally not permitted. In signing the Agreement, authors are asked to represent that the contribution has not been submitted elsewhere for publication.
What To Do If You Suspect A Redundant (Duplicate) Publication?
The following types of "prior publication" do not present cause for concerns about duplicate or redundant publication:
An abstract; a poster, a thesis or dissertation that is not copyright protected; a presentation; or a manuscript posted on a personal or institutional website. If a paper is published and later found redundant, the editor should refer to the COPE Flowcharts and consider working with their publisher to retract the duplicate paper.
Sanctions
For sanctions, HATASO journals follow COPE guidelines in the given link. https://publicationethics.org/files/u7141/1999pdf13.pdf
Plagiarism Policy
Plagiarism is when somebody presents the work of others (data, words or theories) as if they were his/her own and without proper acknowledgment.
One of the biggest problems with journal publications affecting scientific communication is plagiarism. HATASO's policy is based on the Guidelines for Good Publication Practice issued by the COPE. COPE defines plagiarism as HATASO strongly reaffirms its policy of discouraging plagiarism. In accordance with our quality policy, HATASO uses effective plagiarism-checking tools and publishes articles after copyright ownership, if necessary, based on reviewer comments. If an attempted plagiarism is reported to HATASO with realistic evidence, the following actions will be taken: - In case of plagiarism, consult the director of the author being complained about. - Such plagiarism cases are published through the journal in consultation with the respective editorial team.
Plagiarism Of A Published Article
Plagiarized text found in a published manuscript is withdrawn from the journal's website after careful review and approval by the Chief Editor. For electronic versions of plagiarized manuscripts, supplements containing "retraction notes", links to the original papers, and notices of retraction have been published in the respective journals.
Manuscript Suspected Of Plagiarism
https://publicationethics.org/files/u2/02A_Plagiarism_Submitted.pdf
Alleged Plagiarism In Submitted Manuscript
https://publicationethics.org/files/u2/02B_Plagiarism_Published.pdf
https://publicationethics.org/text-recycling-guidelines
Post-Publication Corrections (Amendments)
A formal notice in the journal is usually provided by the authors as it affects the publication record and the scientific accuracy of published information. These amendments are divided into four types: erratums, corrigendums, retractions, and addendums.
1. Erratum
Reporting an error by the journal that adversely affects the publication record, the scientific integrity of the paper, or the reputation of the authors.
2. Corrigendum
Reporting a serious error made by the author(s) that affects the publication record, the scientific integrity of the paper, or the author's or journal's reputation.
3. Retraction
If results are invalid, all co-authors are required to sign a retraction specifying the error and explaining briefly how the conclusions are affected.
4. Addendum
Readers' request for clarification is usually acknowledged by peer-reviewed additions to a paper.
Authorship Policies
1. Authorship
Communications with the journal and co-authors are solely the responsibility of the corresponding (submitting) author. Prior to submission, the corresponding author ensures that all authors are included in the author list, the order is agreed upon, and that they are aware that the paper has been submitted.
2. Change Of Authorship
The HATASO authorship policy prohibits adding or removing names once the article has been submitted to a HATASO journal. If the Corresponding author addresses these concerns, the Chief Editor can consider changing the authorship:
For Adding New Author(s):
a. What are the reasons for adding new author(s)?
b. Provide background information on these newly suggested authors.
c. Can you tell me what these new authors have contributed to your research?
d. When was your article first submitted, and why were their names not included?
A letter from all authors must also be provided stating that they are not opposed to the new names.
For Removal Of Authors:
What is the reason for removing the author(s) names? A letter from all the authors stating that they are not opposed must be provided as well.
3. Authors’ Affiliation
If an author has subsequently relocated to another institution, their current address should also be indicated.
4. Co-Authorship
Authorship and credit should be shared proportionally to the contributions of all co-authors of papers. Taking credit for work performed or contributed to should only be done by authors. Other contributions should be cited in the manuscript's acknowledgments.
Research Ethics In Journal Articles
Indicate patient consent and ethical consent, maintain confidentiality and follow the guidelines of various journals. Clinical research should be carried out according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki (https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical- HYPERLINK "https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/"principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/) in accordance with the guidelines of the ICMJE (https://www.icmje.org) on Patient Consent or Human Participation in Clinical Research. In biomedicine, editors should consider publishing information and images from individual participants only if the author has obtained the individual's free prior informed consent. The ICMJE guidelines state: For example, hiding the eye area in patient photographs is poor protection of anonymity. ” In the social sciences and humanities, there are numerous ethical guidelines for researchers working with human participants. Social and humanities scientists routinely use collected audio and video material in public places where there are no reasonable claims for privacy. We also use materials from broadcast sources, such as some political or cultural research works that require copyright to be addressed but do not raise consent issues. However, social scientists should, where appropriate, protect the confidentiality of human participants and openly communicate information that may affect their willingness to participate, ensuring that all participants are encouraged to participate. You are responsible for obtaining written consent (e.g., publication of research may need to be given to participants).
Guidelines include the American Sociological Association (https://www.asanet.org/wp-content/uploads/savvy/images/asa/docs/pdf/CodeofEthics.pdf), the International Society for Ethnobiology (https://www.ethnobiology.net/what-we-do/core-programs/ise-ethics-program/code-of-ethics/#:~:text=It%20affirms%20the%20commitment%20of,linguistic%20and%20biological%20diversity%3B%20and), and the American Anthropological Association (https://americananthro.org/about/policies/statement-on-ethics/). For social research data, the British and Commonwealth Associations of Social Anthropologists (https://www.theasa.org/ethics/), in their ethical guidelines for good research practice, require written consent for publication, particularly when researchers work with restricted populations. It suggests that it is not always possible or necessary to obtain written consent. However, journals are encouraged to ask authors to provide evidence that informed consent has been obtained. A statement from the American Anthropological Association recommends that what is relevant is not the form of consent but its quality. Images of people who have a genuine interest in or serve an important public need. In such cases, editors should consult and follow the advice of journal owners, publishers and legal experts before taking action.
Research Ethics Policy Regarding Vulnerable Populations
The 4 restricted populations in research have been identified as “vulnerable populations”: pregnant women and fetuses, minors, prisoners, persons with diminished mental capacity, and those who are educationally or economically disadvantaged. The three basic ethical principles, 1) Respect for Persons, 2) Beneficence, and 3) Justice, provide general judgments to justify and guide research involving human subjects. It is imperative to consider additional ethical considerations when conducting research with vulnerable populations, such as children, marginalized communities, and indigenous groups. In order to protect their rights, well-being, and cultural sensitivities, researchers must prioritize their well-being. Informed consent processes should be modified to ensure comprehension, and steps should be taken to minimize power imbalances. In order to foster inclusivity, respect, and equitable outcomes, it is critical that community representatives be involved in the research planning and decision-making process in order to foster collaboration, participation, and participation.
Case Reports: Journals are best off asking authors to confirm whether the person mentioned has given explicit written consent for publication (e.g., case reports). The CARE guidelines (https://www.apa.org/science/leadership/care/guidelines) are useful for editors publishing case reports.
Registering Clinical Trials: The World Health Organization (https://www.who.int/clinical-trials-registry-platform, https://www.who.int/about/ethics) and the Declaration of Helsinki (https://www.who.int/clinical-trials-registry-platform/network/trial-registration#:~:text=The%20Declaration%20of%20Helsinki%20states,agencies%20to%20avoid%20unnecessary%20duplication) suggest that clinical trials should be prospectively enrolled before enrolling participants. The International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers (https://fifarma.org/en/transparency-and-ethics/) also requires its members to register their studies. Law is different. For example, the US FDA Amendments Act of 2007 (https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/selected-amendments-fdc-act/food-and-drug-administration-amendments-act-fdaaa-2007) does not require Phase 1 trial registration. HATASO medical journals ask authors for a clinical trial registration number that must be included in all publications reporting results.
The corresponding statement in the journal note for authors reads: Please include the name of the trial registrar and trial registration number at the end of the abstract. If your study was not registered or was retroactively registered, please explain why.
Animals In Research
A broadly accepted ethical framework for carrying out scientific experiments with animals in a humane manner: replacement - using non-animal methods; reduction - methods of using fewer animals; improvement - animal welfare. The International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (https://iclas.org) publishes ethical guidelines for editors and reviewers. Journals should encourage authors to adhere to animal research reporting standards, such as the ARRIVE (https://arriveguidelines.org) reporting guidelines describing the details that journals should ask authors regarding the study design and statistical analyses. Experimental procedures. Experimental animals. Housing and husbandry. HATASO asks authors to confirm that ethical and legal approval was obtained prior to the start of the study and state the name of the body giving the approval. Authors should also state whether experiments were performed in accordance with relevant institutional and national guidelines and regulations. Editors are required to review all ethics related to animal research. They may request evidence in support of ethical approval of research or interview authors when concerns are raised or clarifications are needed.
Biosecurity
For life science journals, HATASO asks authors to inform at the time of manuscript submission if their research could be used both in good faith and in bad faith, which is often referred to as a "dual use study".
Data Availability And Reporting Guidelines
HATASO requires authors to agree to a data availability statement with all submissions. The statement requires that authors make all original data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available upon request by HATASO. Failure or refusal to provide these data upon request will be grounds for rejection if the manuscript is under review. Authors are expected to maintain all original data for a minimum of 6 years after the final publication date of their article. Accurate and complete reporting enables readers to appraise research, replicate it, and use it fully. HATASO Editors encourage authors to follow their discipline's guidelines for accurate and complete reporting of research to evaluate the methods and results so that readers can reach their conclusions.
