Publication Ethics

ComSpective is a double-blind peer-reviewed magazine dedicated to ensuring the highest values of publication ethics. All stakeholders of the Magazine such as the editors, authors, reviewers, and publishers have to agree upon the total ethical behavior in this context.

Responsibilities of the Editor-in-Chief and the Deputy Editor

• Making an initial evaluation of the articles exclusively based on their academic and intellectual merit, without considering the author’s race, age, gender, sexual orientation, disability, ethnic origin, religious belief, citizenship, political orientation, or social class.
• Deciding which of the articles submitted to the Magazine should be sent for reviewers’ evaluation following the preliminary screening based upon the policies and author guidelines of the Magazine and legal requirements concerning vilification, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
• Ensuring appropriate peer reviewers are selected to evaluate the articles.
• Guaranteeing a fair and unbiased double-blind peer review of the articles and ensure all information related to the authors and reviewers are kept confidential and to ensure both authors’ and peer reviewers’ identities are secured.
• Provision of direction and guidance to members of the Editorial Board, authors, and reviewers on their responsibilities and ethical expectations and also on the description of peer review processes.
• Developing and maintaining a database of appropriate reviewers and updating the same based on reviewer competence, punctuality, and responsiveness.

Responsibilities of the Editorial Board

• Ensuring the maintenance of the overall quality of the Magazine.
• Assuring the international standards of both online and print publications of the Magazine by providing opinions.
• Making a set of clear guidelines available for authors with regard to the subject area of the Magazine and the overall design of the issues.
• Establishing the Magazine policy and ensuring the implementation of it.
• Assisting to ensure the international recognition and acceptance of the Magazine.
• Ensuring the implementation of publication ethics of the Magazine by all the stakeholders.

Responsibilities of the Authors

• Authors should not submit the same article simultaneously to more than one publication at a time. This is found to be an unethical publishing behavior and is obnoxious.
• Authors must ensure and declare that their work is original, represent their own contributions and they have not been copied or plagiarized in whole or part from others’ work, and that any work or statement from other authors or sources has been appropriately acknowledged and referenced.
• Authors should provide citations and references relevant to the submitted work.
• Should understand and act towards the fact that plagiarism in all its forms that exhibits unethical publishing behavior is unacceptable.
• Authors need to submit a written statement that clearly states the article has not been published elsewhere in any form of publishing.
• Authors must take all the responsibilities in ensuring all the ethical considerations of the Magazine.
• All the sources of financial support of the work submitted to the Magazine should be disclosed and acknowledged.
• The Magazine is freely available online. Authors should agree with the open access policy which enables unrestricted access and reuse of all published articles.

Responsibilities of the Reviewers

• Peer reviewers should assist especially the Editor-in-Chief and the Coordinating Editors, and the Editorial Board whenever necessary, in making editorial decisions by submitting their recommendations on eligibility and relevance of the articles for publication.
• Articles received for review must be treated as confidential documents and should not be discussed on their content with outside parties and should not be multiplied in any form.
• If a selected particular reviewer is not competent to review a given article or knows that the timely review of the same will be impossible, should immediately inform the Editor-in-Chief and the Coordinating Editors without delay, enabling the Editors towards calling an alternative reviewer.
• Reviewers are requested to report to the Editors if they are aware of copyright breach and plagiarism on the author’s side.
• Reviewers must strictly evaluate the articles, only based on content, without imagining the author’s race, age, gender, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, religious belief, citizenship, political orientation, or social class.
• Peer review must be done very objectively, with clear logic, so that authors can use it for improving the article.
• Reviewers should not consider any article for reviewing in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, establishments, or institutions connected to the articles.