Information For Authors

1. Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

2. Data Access and Retention
Authors can be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

3. Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.  Similarity index of 25% and less is acceptable.

4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

5. Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

6. Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

5. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

7. Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

8. Withdrawal of Manuscripts
Author is not allowed to withdraw submitted manuscripts, because the withdrawal is waste of valuable resources that editors and referees spent a It is unethical to withdraw a submitted manuscript from one journal if accepted by another journal. The withdrawal of manuscript after the manuscript is accepted for publication, author will be punished by paying US$500 per manuscript. Withdrawal of manuscript is only allowed after withdrawal penalty has been fully paid to the Publisher.

 

2

Reviewers
  • Reviewers must adhere to the timeframe given by the editor(s) for completing the reviews. Requests for extension to review the manuscripts are at the discretion of the editor(s).
  • Reviewers must notify MIJ of any conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
  • Reviewers must keep information pertaining to the manuscript confidential and not used for personal advantage.
  • Reviewers must not discuss their views with others unless authorized by the editor(s).
  • Reviewers must bring to the editor(s’) attention any information that may be reason to reject publication of a manuscript.
  • Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. This include any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.
  • Reviewers should alert the editor(s) of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  • Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts only for their intellectual content.
  • Reviewers assists the editor(s) in the editorial decisions and through editorial communications with the author(s), may assist in the improvement of the paper.
  • Reviewers should be objective in their reviews and express their views clearly with supporting