Publishing Ethics

Duties of the Publisher

College of Science, Al-Nahrain University, as the publisher of the Al-Nahrain Journal of Science (ANJS), takes its duties of guardianship over scholarly records. The publisher recognizes its responsibilities in supporting the efforts made by the journal editors and the work undertaken by the peer review in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. The publisher ensures that best practices are being followed and implemented in its publications. In addition, the publisher supports editors, reviewers, and authors in performing their ethical duties under clear guidelines. The publisher ensures that any commercial revenues do not influence Editorial decisions. All submissions to the journal’s editorial system are subjected to a plagiarism check using iThenticate: Plagiarism Detection Software. Plagiarism should not exceed 5% from a single source, and the overall score for plagiarism should not exceed 15%.   

Duties of Editors

The section editor is exclusively and independently responsible for deciding which manuscript submitted to the Al-Nahrain Journal of Science is worth publishing in the journal. The editors’ decisions are based on the significance of the works submitted to the journal and their importance to the researchers and the readers. The editors are guided by the following:

  1. The reviewers’ comments and recommendations.
  2. Policies of the journal’s editorial board.
  3. Legal issues related to copyright and plagiarism.

Editors of the Al-Nahrain Journal of Science are responsible for the following:

  1. Peer-review of all manuscripts received by the journal based on unbiased and timely procedures. The ANJS assigns three reviewers to each manuscript received. The outcome of the review process is based on the first two agreeing recommendations received. If two contradicting recommendations are received, the third recommendation is deemed decisive for the first review round. The following review rounds may be initiated based on the recommendations made by the reviewers. 
  2. The section editors select the reviewers with suitable expertise in the relevant field of discipline. A selected section editor shall review all disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and suggestions for self-citation made by the reviewers in order to determine whether there is any potential for bias. The authors may nominate or exclude reviewers. In case of exclusion, the author should justify.
  3. Editors shall evaluate manuscripts submitted to the journal without regard to gender, race, religious belief, ethnic origin, and citizenship of the contributing authors.
  4. Editors ensure that the review process is double-masked. The editors shall protect the confidentiality of all submitted materials. Information and ideas obtained throughout the review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.     
  5. The section editors must not attempt to require that references to specific journal articles be included except for genuine scholarly reasons. Authors shall also not be required to include references to the editor’s articles in which the editor is interested.
  6. Papers written and submitted to the Al-Nahrain Journal of Science by the journal editors, their family members, or close colleagues shall not be handled by the same editors. An editorial committee of three members must handle any such submission.
  7. When editors submit their own work to the journal, the review process must be managed by another section editor to avoid conflict of interest.
  8. An editorial committee headed by the editor-in-chief or the managing editor handles complaints against publication misconduct, including duplication and plagiarism.

The following Template can be used to address the author: Letter to Author.

 

Duties of Reviewers
Peer review is the process used to assess the quality of a manuscript before it is published. The peer review model adopted by the Al-Nahrain Journal of Science is a double-masked peer-review process, meaning that authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other during the review process.

Reviewers shall abide by the following:     

  1. Any reviewer who feels unqualified to review a manuscript submitted to the journal or cannot provide a prompt review should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
  2. Reviewers should treat manuscripts and all their contents with confidentiality. Data and information, including unpublished materials, must not be shared with anyone or used for personal advantage.
  3. Reviewers must report to the editor regarding any substantial similarity between the manuscript under review and any published paper. Such observations must be treated with appropriate citations of the original sources.   
  4. Reviewers must be aware that personal criticism of the authors and their work is inappropriate. Reviewers must present their reviews objectively and clearly with supporting arguments.
  5. Potential conflicts of interest between reviewers and authors must be raised by the reviewers and reported to the journal editor(s).
  6. Reviewers’ suggestions to authors on including citations of their works must be based on scientific reasons and not with the intention of increasing the reviewer’s citation count.

Time allowed for the reviewers: The reviewers are expected to complete their reviews within three weeks. Reviewers may request an extension of one week beyond the review due date.

The review Report: The reviewers have to fill out the review form designed by the ANJS. They are also requested to include their comments in a separate report. The reviewers are allowed to insert their comments on a copy file of the manuscript, which will be transferred to the authors in the later stage of the review process.   

Duties of Authors

Authors must report their original research work using a clear and objective discussion about its significance and sufficient details and references to permit other researchers to reproduce the work.

  • Authors should be prepared to provide the research data supporting their manuscript for review and public access (if the reviewers recommend).
  • Authors must properly cite previous work that influenced the submitted and included manuscripts.
  • Authors must understand that plagiarism takes different forms and must avoid all these forms, like copying and paraphrasing substantial parts of other works without attribution and claiming others' results.
  • Authors should not submit the same research results to more than one journal.
  • An author should not submit a previously published work for publication in another journal.
  • Authorship must include those who contributed significantly to the reported work. This consists of the design and participation in experimental procedures or theoretical derivations and interpretation of results.
  • Contributions to language editing and writing and improvements made to the presentations must be recognized in the acknowledgment section of the manuscript.
  • The corresponding author is responsible for appropriately including all the contributing authors and their consent to the manuscript submission.
  • All the contributing authors are held equally and collectively accountable for the submission made to the journal.
  • Authors must ensure that hazardous issues related to chemicals, experimental procedures, and types of equipment are clearly identified in their manuscripts.
  • It is the authors’ responsibility that works on human and animal subjects have complied with the laws and the institutional guidelines and that statements declaring authorities' consent on these issues are included in the submitted manuscripts.
  • Inclusion of personal information and images of patients must be accomplished after securing their consent in writing formats.
  • Authors must acknowledge all sources of financial support, grants, and funds provided for the work accomplished and the results reported in the manuscript.

Post-publication critique: Post-publication critiques are discussions the readers raise for articles published by the journal. Such discussions may be submitted to the ANJS as “letters to the editor.” Al-Nahrain Journal of Science allows such discussions.  If a letter to the editor is received for an article published, the corresponding author is notified and allowed to respond to the critique. ANJS is obliged to consider the outcome of such communication (between readers and authors) for publication if they are found to be constructive and valuable to the community. The following are considered regarding post-publication critique:

  • All critiques are subjected to the peer-review process.
  • Conflict of interest between readers and authors must be clarified.
  • No time limit is imposed between publication and post-publication dates.
  • Publication charges apply to letters to editors.
  • Letters to editors are subjected to plagiarism checks.
  • Critique authors are given the opportunity to seek collaboration with authors on a joint follow-up article.

Conflict of Interests

Conflict of interest refers to a situation that may affect the peer-review process, the editorial decision, and publication management. It also refers to situations that may arise between authors and reviewers in which financial or personal considerations could compromise or bias objectivity or professional judgment. A competing interest may occur where authors or their employers, sponsors, colleagues, or friends have commercial, financial, professional, or legal relationships with other organizations, which could influence the research conducted or interpretation of the results obtained. ANJS requires authors to sign a Conflict of Interest form, which lists all parties involved or relevant to the manuscript, prior to submitting their work for publication. This is taken into consideration to avoid potential bias or future conflicts between authors and reviewers. Submission of the manuscript to ANJS requires that authors of the work must also disclose all funding sources and the role of each funder.

Conflict of Interest Form.docx