Journal of Physical Science Advances (JPSA) recognises that responsible scholarly publishing depends on honesty, transparency, accountability, and respect for the scientific record. Every stage of publication, from manuscript preparation and submission to peer review, editorial decision-making, and post-publication correction, should be conducted with these principles in mind.
The journal expects authors, editors, reviewers, and all individuals involved in the publication process to act professionally and uphold accepted standards of research integrity. Ethical requirements apply to all submissions, irrespective of the subject area, institution, or professional standing of the individuals involved.
This policy describes the journal's general expectations concerning ethical conduct. It should be read together with the individual policies governing plagiarism, authorship, conflicts of interest, and copyright.
Maintaining publication ethics is a shared responsibility. Each participant in the publication process has a distinct role in protecting the integrity and reliability of scholarly communication.
Authors are responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of their submitted work. They must provide an honest account of the research undertaken, acknowledge relevant sources, report findings accurately, disclose competing interests, and ensure that all listed authors have approved the manuscript.
Editors are responsible for evaluating submissions on their scholarly merit, relevance, and suitability for the journal. Editorial decisions must be based on the quality and scientific content of a manuscript rather than the authors' identity, institutional affiliation, nationality, personal relationships, or other irrelevant considerations.
Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based assessments. They should identify relevant work that has not been cited, explain concerns about methodology or interpretation, disclose potential conflicts of interest, and maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts under review.
The editorial office is responsible for maintaining appropriate submission records, communicating editorial decisions, handling confidential manuscript information, and supporting the consistent application of the journal's publication policies.
Research submitted to JPSA should be conducted and reported honestly. Authors are expected to preserve the accuracy of their research records and present methods, observations, results, and interpretations without deliberate distortion.
Where research involves human participants, animals, personal information, or other activities requiring formal ethical oversight, authors should obtain the relevant approvals before conducting the research and report applicable approval information in the manuscript.
Authors should also ensure that appropriate consent, confidentiality, and safeguards have been observed wherever the nature of the research requires them. The journal may request supporting information concerning ethical approval or consent when relevant.
JPSA does not accept research practices that compromise the reliability of scientific findings or misrepresent the contributions of researchers. Potential forms of misconduct include:
Inventing experimental observations, measurements, results, or other research information and presenting them as genuine findings.
Manipulating research materials, equipment, procedures, images, data, or results in a way that misrepresents the actual research or its findings.
Using another person's language, ideas, research, data, or intellectual contribution without appropriate acknowledgement. Such cases are addressed under the journal's Plagiarism Policy.
Misrepresenting who contributed to a manuscript, including honorary authorship, ghost authorship, omission of eligible contributors, or inaccurate contribution statements.
Submitting substantially the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously or presenting previously published work as a new and independent contribution without appropriate disclosure.
Attempting to influence editorial decisions through fabricated reviewer identities, undisclosed relationships, coercion, inappropriate communication, or other improper means.
The presence of an allegation does not automatically establish misconduct. Concerns should be examined on the basis of relevant evidence and the circumstances of the particular case.
Peer review is an important part of the scholarly assessment of submitted manuscripts. Reviewers should assess the scientific content independently and provide comments that are relevant, reasoned, and constructive.
Reviewers must not use unpublished information obtained through the review process for personal research, professional advantage, or any other unauthorised purpose. Manuscripts and associated information must be treated as confidential.
Editors should ensure that reviewer selection and editorial decisions are not improperly influenced by personal relationships, competing interests, or external pressure. Suspected manipulation of peer review should be examined as a publication-ethics concern.
The journal's detailed review arrangements, including the applicable review model and submission procedure, are described in its separate peer-review policy.
Information contained in submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, and associated records should be handled with appropriate confidentiality.
Editors and reviewers must not disclose unpublished manuscript content to unauthorised individuals. Information obtained through editorial duties must not be used for personal benefit or to disadvantage authors.
Confidentiality may be subject to appropriate exceptions where disclosure is necessary to investigate a serious ethical concern or comply with a legitimate institutional or legal requirement.
Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose relationships or interests that could influence, or reasonably be perceived to influence, their professional judgement.
Relevant interests may be financial, professional, institutional, personal, or academic. A disclosed conflict does not necessarily prevent participation in the publication process; it should be assessed and managed appropriately.
Further requirements are provided in the journal's Conflict of Interest Policy.
The integrity of the published scholarly record must be maintained even after an article has appeared in the journal. Where significant errors or ethical concerns are identified, the editorial team may assess whether a formal post-publication notice is required.
A correction may be appropriate where an error can be addressed without invalidating the central findings or conclusions of an article. An expression of concern may be considered when a serious issue requires further examination but the available information is not yet sufficient for a final conclusion.
Retraction may be considered where the reliability of an article is seriously compromised, including cases involving established plagiarism, fabricated or falsified results, or other substantial publication-ethics violations.
Editorial notices should clearly identify the affected publication and explain the reason for the action to the extent appropriate.
Concerns about possible ethical misconduct may be brought to the attention of the editorial office by authors, reviewers, readers, researchers, or other relevant parties. Reports should include sufficient information to allow the concern to be examined.
When a potential ethical concern is identified, the editorial team may examine the available information and request clarification or supporting documentation from the relevant authors or other parties.
Where necessary, the journal may seek additional evidence, consult relevant editorial expertise, or contact an author's affiliated institution or another appropriate authority. The nature of the concern will determine the appropriate course of examination.
Following consideration of the available evidence and explanations, the journal may decide to proceed with the manuscript, request clarification or revision, suspend processing, reject the submission, or take another appropriate action.
Where a concern relates to an already published article, the journal may consider a correction, an expression of concern, or retraction, depending on the seriousness of the issue and its effect on the scholarly record.
The journal may request explanations from the individuals concerned and, where appropriate, consult relevant institutions or authorities. Any editorial action should be proportionate to the available evidence and the seriousness of the issue.
Editorial decisions should be based on scholarly merit, relevance to the journal's scope, and applicable publication requirements. Commercial, personal, institutional, or other external considerations should not improperly determine whether a manuscript is accepted or rejected.
Individuals involved in editorial decisions must disclose relevant competing interests and should not participate in decisions where their impartiality may reasonably be questioned.
The following policies provide additional requirements concerning specific areas of publication ethics:
