Advances in Mathematics: Scientific Journal

Union of Researchers of Macedonia, R. North Macedonia

Home
Editorial Board
General Policy
Publication Ethics
Review Process
Indexing
Submission of manuscript
All Issues
Special Issues
Contact

Publication Ethics

Publication ethics statement establishes the minimum standards to which authors, reviewers, and editors are required to adhere, as well as, policies regarding plagiarism, conflict of interest, post-publication corrections, retraction of a paper, and privacy.

This journal follows, approves and supports the International Mathematical Union’s Best Current Practices for Journals (2010), the European Mathematical Society Ethics Committee - Code of Practice (2012), and Guidelines set by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).

A. Standards and Responsibilities of Editors

The following principles aim to ensure a fair, ethical, and transparent editorial process, maintaining the integrity and quality of publications.

• Fair and Equal Treatment. All submitted manuscripts must be evaluated impartially, ensuring that authors receive equal and fair treatment regardless of their gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, or ethnic and geographical background.
• Assignment of Manuscripts. Upon submission, each manuscript is assigned to a member of the Editorial Board, known as the handling editor, who is responsible for overseeing the review process.
• Peer Review Process. All submitted manuscripts undergo a single-blind peer review by two referees, who provide feedback, whether positive or negative. The handling editor selects the referees based on their expertise in the subject matter.
• Confidentiality and Privacy. Editors must respect the confidentiality of both authors and referees throughout the manuscript evaluation process. Information provided by authors should remain strictly confidential and be used solely for purposes related to the assessment of the manuscript.
• Editorial Oversight. The handling editor is responsible for managing revisions, improvements, and any modifications required during the review process. They should maintain confidential communication with both authors and referees to facilitate the peer-review process effectively.
• Decision-Making Process. Editors must base their recommendations to the Editor-in-Chief regarding the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript solely on the referees’ reports and the scientific merit of the paper, ensuring that no external factors influence their decision.
• Scientific Integrity. Manuscripts should be evaluated purely based on their scientific quality, originality, and contribution to the field, without any form of bias or undue influence.
• Ethical Guidelines for Referees. Clear ethical guidelines must be established for referees to ensure the integrity of the peer-review process and uphold the quality of published research.
• Monitoring and Improvement. Editors should regularly assess the performance of referees to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of manuscript evaluations.
• Handling Research Misconduct. If research misconduct is identified, the editor or publisher must address the allegations appropriately. Depending on the severity of the case, the editor may recommend retraction of the paper.
• Accountability and Acknowledgment of Errors. Editors and referees should take responsibility for any errors in handling a manuscript and be willing to issue an apology to the authors if necessary.

B. Standards and Responsibilities of Reviewers

Peer reviewers play a critical role in maintaining the integrity and quality of publications. They are expected to adhere to the following principles and responsibilities:

1. Expertise and Objectivity
   • Reviewers should accept only those manuscripts for evaluation that fall within their area of expertise and that they can assess in a timely manner.
   • Reviews should be objective and constructive, avoiding hostile, inflammatory, libelous, or derogatory comments.
   • The evaluation process should be free from bias, ensuring that manuscripts are assessed fairly, irrespective of the authors’ nationality, gender, political or religious beliefs, or any other personal characteristics.
2. Confidentiality and Ethical Conduct
   • Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the peer-review process and not disclose any details of the manuscript or the review, both during and after the process, beyond what is officially released by the journal.
   • Information obtained during the review process should not be used for personal gain or to benefit any individual or organization, nor should it be used to disadvantage or discredit others.
   • Any suspected ethical concerns, such as plagiarism, duplicate publication, or authorship inconsistencies, should be promptly reported to the editor.
3. Conflict of Interest
   • Reviewers should declare any potential conflicts of interest that may affect their impartiality and seek guidance from the journal if uncertain.
   • If a conflict of interest exists, the reviewer should decline the review and notify the editor, suggesting an alternative qualified reviewer if possible.
4. Quality and Integrity of Feedback
   • Reviewers should provide a clear, thorough, and well-reasoned evaluation of the manuscript, offering constructive feedback to help authors improve their work.
   • Feedback should be provided for every manuscript, whether the assessment is positive or negative, as negative reports can help authors refine their research for future publication.
   • If citations to the reviewer’s own work are suggested, they should be relevant and already referenced by the manuscript’s authors.
5. Commitment to the Review Process
   • Peer review is a reciprocal process; reviewers should contribute their fair share by accepting review requests in their field of expertise and completing them in a timely manner.
   • Reviewers should be willing to assess both the original submission and any revised versions, ensuring consistency in the evaluation process.
   • Providing inaccurate or misleading personal and professional information, as well as impersonating another individual during the review process, constitutes serious misconduct.
6. Academic Integrity and Reporting Misconduct
   • If a reviewer becomes aware that the manuscript, in whole or in part, has been previously published elsewhere, they should inform the editor.
   • Reviewers should notify the editor if they detect any irregularities, such as the inclusion of authors who have not contributed to the work or the omission of those who have made significant contributions.

C. Standards and Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are expected to adhere to the following ethical standards when preparing and submitting manuscripts for publication. In that way they contribute to a transparent, ethical, and high-quality research publication process.

1. Originality and Plagiarism
   • Authors must ensure that their submitted work is original, has not been plagiarized, and has not been published elsewhere. Manuscripts should not be under review by another journal while being evaluated.
2. Ethical Research and Responsible Reporting
   • Research should be conducted ethically and in compliance with all relevant laws and regulations.
   • Authors must present their findings honestly, avoiding fabrication, falsification, selective reporting, or inappropriate data manipulation.
   • Research methods should be described clearly and unambiguously to allow others to replicate and verify the results.
3. Authorship and Acknowledgments
   • Authorship should accurately reflect each individual’s contributions to the research and manuscript.
   • All co-authors must consent to the submission of the manuscript and agree to its content.
   • Any external assistance, including contributions from colleagues, institutions, or organizations, must be properly acknowledged.
   • Authors should disclose all funding sources and potential conflicts of interest.
4. Proper Citation and Use of Previous Work
   • All referenced works, including prior publications by the author, must be appropriately cited. If the manuscript incorporates parts of previously published work, this should be clearly indicated and referenced.
5. Corrections and Clarifications
   • Authors have the opportunity to correct errors in their published work and provide clarifications when necessary. The journal will facilitate such corrections to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the research record.
6. Corresponding Author Responsibilities
   • The corresponding author is responsible for communicating with the editor regarding reviewer recommendations, manuscript authenticity, and any other relevant issues.

D. Plagiarism Policy

Plagiarism is strictly prohibited in this journal. All submitted manuscripts undergo thorough scrutiny using advanced plagiarism detection tools (iThenticate) to ensure the originality of the work. If instances of unattributed use of ideas, text, or results are identified, immediate action is taken.

In cases where plagiarism is detected, the authors are formally notified of the rejection of their submission along with a clear explanation of the reasons for this decision. If the submitted work incorporates previously published material authored by the same researchers, proper acknowledgment and citation of the original source must be provided, following clearance from the original publisher.

If plagiarism is identified post-publication, appropriate corrective measures, including formal corrections or retractions, will be implemented in accordance with the journal’s editorial policies.

E. Conflict of Interest Policy

Definition of a Conflict of Interest. A conflict of interest, also referred to as a “competing interest,” arises when an individual, their employer, or a sponsoring entity has financial, commercial, legal, or professional affiliations with organizations or individuals that could potentially influence the research process or its outcomes.

When submitting a manuscript for publication, authors are required to fully disclose any potential conflicts of interest. This information is compulsory and is used by the journal editor to make informed editorial decisions and may be published to ensure transparency for readers. In certain cases, if a declared conflict of interest is deemed significant, the editor may decide not to proceed with the publication.

Authors should disclose conflicts of interest either in the email whwn submitting the manuscrpt or within the manuscipt. To uphold transparency, any relationships or circumstances that could be perceived as conflicts of interest must be declared, regardless of their financial implications.

Conflict of interests can be financial or non-financial in nature.

• Financial conflicts of interest include, but are not limited to:
  • Employment or voluntary positions related to the research topic.
  • Research funding, grants, or financial support received by the author or their institution.
  • Personal fees, including honoraria, royalties, consulting fees, lecture fees, or expert testimonies.
  • Patents held or pending by the author, their institution, or funding organizations, regardless of whether royalties are earned.
  • Royalties received by the author or their institution.
  • Any financial gain resulting from the development of products associated with the research.
    
    
• Conflicts of interest that are non-financial in nature may include:
  • Receipt of specialized equipment, software, or digital applications from an entity that may benefit from the publication.
  • Access to exclusive data repositories, archival resources, or collections provided by organizations with a vested interest in the research findings.
  • Receiving assistance with writing, editing, or administrative support from individuals or organizations with a potential interest in the publication.
  • Involvement in legal proceedings related to the subject matter of the research.

Authors are expected to disclose all relevant conflicts of interest to maintain the integrity of the peer-review and publication process.

F. Post-Publication Corrections

Authors have the right to request corrections to their published work. To initiate such a request, authors must provide sufficient justification, such as concerns related to data reliability, mislabeling of figures or tables, omissions, typographical errors, or incorrect spelling of names. The editor will review the request and determine the appropriate course of action. Authors will be informed of one of the following outcomes: the requested corrections are approved, further investigation is required, or the corrections are not aproved.

G. Retraction and Editorial Actions

The editor and/or editorial board hold the authority to retract published articles when necessary and to inform readers of the retraction, along with the reasons behind it. Retraction may be warranted under the following circumstances:

• Evidence of plagiarism
• Identification of significant errors that compromise the integrity of the research
• Use of falsified or fabricated data or results
• Copyright infringement
• Failure to disclose conflicts of interest

Retracted articles will remain available online, clearly marked as retracted in all digital formats, including the PDF, to ensure transparency for future readers.

The journal will publish an erratum under the following circumstances:

• If a minor section of an otherwise credible publication is found to be misleading, particularly due to an unintentional error.
• If there is an inaccuracy in the list of authors, such as the omission of a qualified contributor or the inclusion of an individual who does not meet the authorship criteria.

For additional guidance on retractions and related procedures, reference may be made to the COPE flowcharts and retraction guidelines.

H. Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses provided on this journal’s platform will be used solely for the intended purposes of the journal and will not be shared or disclosed for any other use or to any third party.