Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics

Applied Engineering, Innovation, and Technology (AEIT) is committed to following best practices on publication ethics. The following policy is based mainly on the Core Practices from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). This policy should be read in conjunction with the journal’s author guidelines.

Duties of Editors

Review of Manuscripts

Editors will take all reasonable steps to ensure that peer referees’ identities are protected, and that the peer review process is fair, unbiased and timely.

Publication Decisions

Editorial decisions are not affected by the origins of the manuscript, including the nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, or religion of the authors. The decision to accept or reject a paper for publication is based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the remit of the journal.

Confidentiality

Editors will ensure that the information and material submitted by the authors remains confidential while under consideration for the journal, and will only be disclosed as appropriate to the author(s), referees, potential referees, other editorial advisors and MSD Institute.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper for their own research purposes without the author’s explicit written consent. Submissions made to a journal by the Editor will be handled by an alternative Editor to ensure the process remains fair and unbiased.

Intellectual Property

Editors will ensure that all submissions are checked for originality using Turnitin’s similarity check software prior to peer-review. Editors should be alert to intellectual property issues and will work with MSD Institute to ensure that the COPE guidance on handling of intellectual property is followed.

Data Protection Requirements

The Editors agree to comply with the provisions of the General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (as applicable), the Data Protection Act 2018, Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations, and codes of practice issued by the Information Commissioner from time to time (all as amended, extended, re-enacted or replaced from time to time), in so far as the same relates to the provisions and obligations of this Agreement.

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards

Authors should present their results accurately, clearly and honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. Misleading, selective or ambiguous reporting should be avoided. Authors should strive to describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that their findings can be confirmed by others. The submission guidelines of the journal must be followed.

Acknowledgement of Sources, Plagiarism, Infringement of Copyright and Infringement of Moral Rights and Submission to Multiple Publications

Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work, acknowledge all sources of data and appropriately represent the work or words of others in citations or quotations. Copyright material (e.g. tables, figures or extensive quotations) should be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement. Authors should ensure that they have not submitted the same manuscript or manuscripts describing essentially the same work to more than one journal concurrently.

Plagiarism and Similarity

Plagiarism in any form is not acceptable. The journal uses Turnitin's originality checking tool to detect similarities in all submitted manuscripts. A maximum of 15% similarity is allowed. Should the similarity index exceed 15%, the article will be returned to the author for correction and resubmission.

Definition

Plagiarism involves the "use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work."

We welcome submissions from authors and will consider these for publication where work has not previously been published and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. However, we do not view the following prior uses of a work as prior publication:

  • Publication in the form of an abstract
  • Publication as an academic thesis
  • Publication as an electronic preprint

Any material taken verbatim from another source needs to be clearly identified as different from the present original text by (1) indentation, (2) use of quotation marks, and (3) identification of the source. Any text of an amount exceeding fair use standards (herein defined as more than two or three sentences or the equivalent thereof) or any graphic material reproduced from another source requires permission from the copyright holder and, if feasible, the original author(s) and also requires identification of the source; e.g., previous publication.

When plagiarism is identified, the Editor in Chief responsible for the review of this paper and will agree on measures according to the extent of plagiarism detected in the paper in agreement with the following guidelines:

Level of Plagiarism

  • Minor: A short section of another article is plagiarized without any significant data or idea taken from the other paper. Action: A warning is given to the authors and a request to change the text and properly cite the original article is made
  • Intermediate: A significant portion of a paper is plagiarized without proper citation to the original paper. Action: The submitted article is rejected and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles for one year
  • Severe: A significant portion of a paper is plagiarized that involves reproducing original results or ideas presented in another publication. Action: The paper is rejected and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles for five years.

If a penalty is imposed for plagiarism, all authors will be subject to the same penalty. If the second case of plagiarism by the same author(s) is identified, a decision on the measures to be enforced will be made by the Editorial board (Editor-in-Chief, and Editorial members) with the Chair of the Editor-in-Chief. The author(s) might be forbidden to submit further articles forever.

This policy applies also to material reproduced from another publication by the same author(s). If an author uses text or figures that have previously been published, the corresponding paragraphs or figures should be identified, and the previous publication referenced. It is understood that in the case of a review paper or a paper of a tutorial nature much of the material was previously published.

The author should identify the source of the previously published material and obtain permission from the original author and the publisher. If an author submits a manuscript to the journal with significant overlap with a manuscript submitted to another journal simultaneously, and this overlap is discovered during the review process or after the publications of both papers, the editor of the other journal is notified, and the case is treated as a severe plagiarism case. Significant overlap means the use of identical or almost identical figures and identical or slightly modified text for one-half or more of the paper. For self-plagiarism of less than one-half of the paper but more than one tenth of the paper, the case shall be treated as intermediate plagiarism. If self-plagiarism is confined to the methods section, the case shall be considered as minor plagiarism.

If an author uses some of his previously published material to clarify the presentation of new results, the previously published material shall be identified and the difference to the present publication shall be mentioned. Permission to republish must be obtained from the copyright holder. In the case of a manuscript that was originally published in conference proceedings and then is submitted for publication in the journal either in identical or in expanded form, the authors must identify the name of the conference proceedings and the date of the publication and obtain permission to republish from the copyright holder. The editor may decide not to accept this paper for publication.

However, an author shall be permitted to use material from an unpublished presentation, including visual displays, in a subsequent journal publication. In the case of a publication being submitted, that was originally published in another language, the title, date, and journal of the original publication must be identified by the authors, and the copyright must be obtained. The editor may accept such a translated publication to bring it to the attention of a wider audience. The editor may select a specific paper that had been published for republication in order to provide a better perspective of a series of papers published in one issue of the journal. This republication shall be clearly identified as such and the date and journal of the original publication shall be given, and the permission of the author(s) and the publisher shall be obtained.

The journal layout editor is responsible for maintaining the list of authors subjected to penalties and will check that no authors of a submitted paper are on this list. If a banned author is identified, the layout editor will inform the Editor-in-Chief who will take appropriate measures. This policy will be posted on the website with the instructions for submitting a manuscript, and a copy will be sent to the authors with the confirmation email upon initial receipt of their original manuscript.

Authorship

We believe in clear, transparent and verifiable authorship. In line with ICMJE guidance, to qualify for authorship, each individual must:

  • Have made a substantial contribution to the concept or design of the article; or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the article; AND
  • Drafted the article or revised it critically for important intellectual content; AND
  • Approved the version to be published; AND
  • Agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Contributors who do not meet all these criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgements section. It is the author's responsibility to obtain written approval by any persons named in the Acknowledgements section.

The submitting author must ensure that all authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and to the inclusion of their names as co-authors or to the inclusion of their names in the Acknowledgements section.

The contributions of each author to the work must now be indicated as part of the submission process, and you will be asked to add Author Contributions using CRediT Taxonomy. Each author on a paper may have one or more CRediT contribution roles, but having a role described by the taxonomy does not automatically qualify one as author.

The submitting author is responsible for ensuring all qualifying authors are included on submission with the correct spelling, institution and address details and in the agreed order. The primary affiliation listed for each author should be where the majority of the work was done. If the author has subsequently moved, the current address may be listed as a second affiliation. The Acknowledgements section may be used to further clarify if some or all of the work was conducted at one or more different institutions. We strongly encourage the use of institutional email addresses for all authors listed on your manuscript. If we are unable to verify the identities of any of the authors, your paper may be withdrawn or rejected.

Unacceptable Authorship Types

The following types of authorship are considered unacceptable and a contravention of publication ethics:

  • "Ghost" authors, who contribute substantially but are not acknowledged;
  • "Guest"/"Gift" authors, who have made very little or no contribution to the work and do not qualify for authorship.

The journal does not recognize AI tools as authors or as able to fulfil authorship criteria, as they cannot take responsibility for the submitted work. If AI tools were used in the preparation of any part of the paper, this should be clearly disclosed in the appropriate section of the paper, and authors take full responsibility for the paper in its entirety.

Limit on Number of Submissions per Author

In order to ensure sufficient diversity within the authorship of our journals, authors will be limited to being listed as an author (including as a co-author) on five manuscripts submitted for consideration in a single journal and ten manuscripts submitted for consideration across the MSD Institute Journals within a 12-month period.

This policy does not apply to editorials and other non-peer-reviewed manuscript types.

Authorship Change Requests

Authors are expected to consider carefully the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and to provide the definitive list of authors with the correct institutions and verifiable details at the time of the original submission.

Adding and/or deleting authors after submission (including at revision stage) is generally not permitted and will only be considered in exceptional circumstances and only where the authorship change complies with this journal's authorship policy. No requests to amend the authorship can be made after the manuscript has been accepted. Any changes to the listed authors on a paper must be done via an Authorship Change Form which can be requested from the Editorial Office. Any changes to authorship between submission and acceptance must be approved by all authors (including any authors to be removed) and justified. In addition to this, we require the change(s) stated in the form to be approved by the Head of Department of the submitting author (and by the Head of Department of the corresponding author if different).

All requests made will be assessed by the Editorial Office and Editor, and we may request further evidence or contact the authors' institutions to confirm the contribution of each author. The journal reserves the right to refuse requests we do not believe conform with our authorship policies.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All sources of financial support must be disclosed in the submitted manuscript. A statement should also be included disclosing any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be seen to influence the results or interpretation of the presented work.

Significant Errors in the Work

Authors should alert the Editor promptly if they discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their submitted, accepted or published work. Authors should cooperate with the Editor in issuing retractions or corrections when required.

Duties of Referees

Confidentiality

Referees should respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that that are released by the journal.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Referees should ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in their reported work. If the referee finds that the manuscript has similarity or overlap with any other published paper, this must be brought to the attention of the Editor immediately.

Standards of Objectivity

Referees should not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations. Referees should be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory, and from making libelous or derogatory personal comments.

Promptness

Referees should only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Referees should not agree to review any manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions. Referees should not use information obtained during the peer review process for their own or any other person’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others.

Corrections and Errata

The journal is committed to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the published record. When errors are identified in published articles, whether by the authors, editors, or readers, the editorial office will assess the nature of the error and take appropriate corrective action.

Types of Corrections

  • Erratum: An erratum is issued for a minor error introduced by the authors that does not affect the findings, conclusions, or integrity of the work. Examples include typographical errors, minor labelling mistakes in figures, or small factual inaccuracies. An erratum notice is published as a separate item, linked to the original article in the journal system.
  • Correction: A correction is issued when an error is more substantial but does not invalidate the overall findings or conclusions of the work. Examples include errors in data presentation, incorrect units, or miscalculations in secondary analyses. A correction notice is published and linked to the original article, and the article itself is updated accordingly with a clear notation of the change and the date it was made.
  • Publisher’s Correction: When an error is introduced during the production process (e.g., typesetting, formatting, or metadata errors) rather than by the authors, the journal will issue a publisher's correction and update the published article at no cost to the authors.

Process

Authors who identify an error in their published work should contact the Editorial Office at the earliest opportunity. Readers and reviewers who identify potential errors are also encouraged to contact the Editorial Office. All correction requests will be assessed by the Editor-in-Chief. The decision on the type and scope of correction required rests with the Editor-in-Chief in consultation with the authors.

Corrections will be published promptly once agreed upon. The original article will be updated in the journal system with a visible correction notice, and both the original version and the corrected version will remain traceable in the publication record where technically feasible.

Retractions

The journal will consider retracting a published article if one or more of the following conditions apply:

  1. There is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, whether due to misconduct (e.g., data fabrication or falsification) or honest error (e.g., significant miscalculation or experimental error) that invalidates the conclusions.
  2. The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission, or justification (redundant or duplicate publication).
  3. The work constitutes plagiarism.
  4. The work reports unethical research.

The retraction process follows the COPE Retraction Guidelines. Retracted articles will remain visible in the journal system with a clear retraction notice, the date of retraction, and the reason for retraction. The original article will not be removed from the public record.

The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the publisher (MSD Institute), holds responsibility for deciding whether to issue a retraction. Where allegations of misconduct are received, the editorial office will investigate in a timely and confidential manner, following COPE guidance on handling such cases. Authors, institutions, or third parties who believe a published article warrants retraction are encouraged to contact the Editorial Office with documented evidence.

Expressions of Concern

In cases where an investigation into a published article is ongoing and a definitive conclusion cannot yet be reached, the Editor-in-Chief may issue an Expression of Concern. This serves to alert readers that the reliability of the work is under review, without prejudging the outcome. An Expression of Concern will be replaced by a formal correction, retraction, or exoneration notice once the investigation is concluded.