Journal of Special Education and
Rehabilitation (JSER) is dedicated to following best practices on ethical
matters, errors and retractions. The prevention of publication malpractice is
one of the important responsibilities of the editorial board. Any kind of
unethical behavior is not acceptable, and Journal of Special Education and
Rehabilitation (JSER) does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors
submitting articles to Journal of Special Education and Rehabilitation
(JSER) affirm that manuscript contents are original. Furthermore, they
warrant that their article has neither been published elsewhere in any language
fully or partly, nor is it under review for publication anywhere.
17.1. Publication
decisions
The editor of the journal is
responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should
be published. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's
editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in
force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may
confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
17.2. Fair
play
An editor will at any time evaluate
manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender,
sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political
philosophy of the authors.
17.3. Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff
must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other
than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial
advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
17.4. Disclosure
and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a
submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the
express written consent of the author.
17.5. Duties
of Reviewers
17.5.1. Contribution
to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in
making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the
author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
17.5.2. Promptness
Any selected referee who feels
unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its
prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself
from the review process.
17.5.3. Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review
must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or
discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
17.5.4. Standards
of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted
objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should
express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
17.5.5. Acknowledgement
of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant
published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an
observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be
accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the
editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript
under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal
knowledge.
17.5.6. Disclosure
and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas
obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for
personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider 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 connected to the papers.
17.6. Duties
of Authors
17.6.1. 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.
17.6.2. Data
Access and Retention
Authors are 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.
17.6.3. 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.
17.6.4. 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.
17.6.5. 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.
17.6.6. 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.
17.6.7. 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.
17.6.8. 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.
