Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts based exclusively on their scholarly merit-considering factors such as significance, originality, rigor, and clarity-and their relevance to the journal’s thematic focus. The authors’ personal characteristics, including but not limited to race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, nationality, religion, political beliefs, or institutional affiliation, do not influence the editorial decision-making process. Editorial decisions are free from external influence by any governmental or organizational policies, with full editorial control residing solely with the Editor-in-Chief, who determines the journal’s content and publication timeline.

The editorial team is committed to maintaining the confidentiality of all submissions. Information regarding a manuscript will only be disclosed to individuals directly involved in the editorial process, including the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and necessary editorial and publishing staff.

Editors and editorial board members will not exploit any unpublished information from a submitted manuscript for their personal research without obtaining explicit, written consent from the authors. Any confidential data or ideas acquired during the review process will be treated with discretion and will not be used for personal benefit. Should an editor have any conflict of interest arising from relationships-whether competitive, collaborative, or otherwise-with the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript, they will step aside from the review process and delegate the manuscript to another qualified editorial board member.

Editors ensure that all manuscripts considered for publication undergo a rigorous peer-review process, evaluated by at least two experts in the relevant field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final decision regarding publication, based on the validity of the research, its relevance to scholars and readers, feedback from reviewers, and compliance with legal standards, including those related to libel, copyright, and plagiarism. In making these decisions, the Editor-in-Chief may consult other editors or external reviewers for additional input.

In cases where ethical concerns arise regarding a submitted or published manuscript, editors will work in collaboration with the publisher and relevant scholarly bodies to take appropriate action. All allegations of unethical conduct in publishing will be thoroughly investigated, regardless of when the issue is brought to light. Should the investigation confirm the ethical breach, the journal will issue the necessary corrective measures, such as a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other formal notice.

Peer review plays a pivotal role in assisting editors with publication decisions and in helping authors enhance their manuscripts through constructive feedback. This process is integral to the advancement of scholarly communication and the integrity of research. The “Oriental Art and Culture” Scientific-Methodical Journal, like many others, encourages scholars to actively participate in the peer-review process, viewing it as a responsibility of the academic community to ensure fairness and uphold research quality.

Reviewers who feel unqualified to assess the content of a manuscript, or who are unable to provide a timely review, should notify the editors promptly and decline the invitation. This allows the editorial team to identify alternative reviewers without unnecessary delays in the review process.

Manuscripts submitted for review are confidential materials and must be treated as such by all reviewers. They should not be shared, discussed, or disclosed to others without explicit permission from the Editor-in-Chief, which will only be granted in exceptional, clearly justified cases. This confidentiality obligation extends to invited reviewers who decide to decline the review.

Reviews should be conducted in a fair and unbiased manner, offering clear, constructive, and well-reasoned feedback that authors can use to enhance their manuscript. Personal criticism or hostility directed towards the authors is unacceptable and goes against the principles of scholarly discourse.

Reviewers are expected to highlight any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. If the manuscript contains information, calculations, or arguments previously published, the corresponding references must be properly cited. Additionally, reviewers should inform the editors if they are aware that the manuscript is significantly similar to another work, either published or unpublished.

Reviewers who recognize any conflict of interest-whether due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors, companies, or institutions related to the manuscript-must immediately notify the editors and recuse themselves from the review process. Furthermore, reviewers must not use unpublished information contained in the manuscript for their own research without obtaining written consent from the authors. Information and ideas obtained during peer review are to be kept confidential and not utilized for personal benefit, even if the reviewer declines to review the manuscript.

Authors submitting original research must provide an accurate account of their work, including an honest presentation of their findings and an objective assessment of the significance of their research. The manuscript should include sufficient detail and references to enable replication of the study by others. Reviews should be comprehensive, accurate, and neutral, while editorials and opinion pieces must be clearly identified as such. Fabricating data or making deliberately misleading statements is unethical and unacceptable in scholarly publishing.

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data underlying their study for editorial review and should be prepared to make such data publicly available when feasible. Regardless, authors are responsible for ensuring that their data is available to other qualified researchers for at least 10 years following publication, preferably through an institutional or subject-specific data repository. This is contingent on the protection of participant confidentiality and compliance with any legal restrictions on proprietary data.

Authors must guarantee that their submitted work is entirely original. If they have drawn on the work or words of others, appropriate citations must be provided. Significant works that have influenced the research should also be acknowledged in the manuscript. Plagiarism, in all its forms-whether representing another’s work as one’s own, copying or paraphrasing large sections of another’s work without acknowledgment, or claiming results from another researcher’s study-is a serious breach of publishing ethics and is strictly prohibited.

Authors must not submit or publish the same research in multiple journals. Concurrent submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals is considered unethical and is prohibited. In cases where secondary publication is justified-such as with translations or clinical guidelines-both the authors and editors of the involved journals must approve it. The secondary publication must accurately reflect the original document, including its data and interpretations, and must appropriately cite the primary source.

Authorship should be limited to those who meet the following criteria, as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content of the manuscript: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data collection, or analysis/interpretation of the study; (ii) participated in drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for substantial intellectual content; and (iii) reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication. Individuals who contributed significantly to the research but do not meet the criteria for authorship (such as those providing technical assistance, writing and editing support, or general contributions) should be acknowledged in the “Acknowledgements” section, provided their written permission to be named has been obtained. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all legitimate coauthors are included and that no inappropriate coauthors are listed. They must also confirm that all coauthors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript and consented to its submission.

Authors must fully disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence the interpretation of their manuscript. All financial support for the research, as well as any other relevant financial or non-financial relationships, should be disclosed. Authors must ensure that the manuscript presents an unbiased account of the research, free from the influence of conflicts of interest. If conflicts arise, they must be addressed transparently to maintain the integrity of the research and publication process.

Authors must ensure that proper credit is given to the work of others and must cite any publications that have significantly influenced the research being reported. Information obtained through private communication, correspondence, or discussions should not be used or published without the explicit written consent of the source. Additionally, any information gained through confidential services-such as peer review of manuscripts or grant applications-must not be used without the written permission of the authors of the original work.

Authors are responsible for actively participating in the peer review process. This includes responding promptly to editorial requests for additional information such as raw data, clarifications, ethical approval documentation, patient consent forms, or copyright permissions. If the manuscript is returned for revision, authors should carefully address the reviewers’ comments and submit a revised version within the specified deadline.

If authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they are obligated to notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate in correcting the paper through an erratum or retraction. Should a third party notify the editors or publisher of an error, the authors are responsible for either correcting the work or providing evidence to support the accuracy of their findings.

The publisher, in collaboration with the editors, is responsible for addressing any allegations or evidence of scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism. This may involve publishing an erratum, issuing a clarification, or retracting the affected work. The publisher and editors are committed to preventing the publication of research that involves unethical behavior and will take all necessary measures to ensure the integrity of the publication process.