EDITORS' RESPONSIBILITIES

Publication Decisions: Editors should be responsible for everything published in their articles, and they should aim to fulfill the needs of readers and writers. Decisions made by editors to approve or deny a paper for publication should be based on feedback by the editorial board and the value of the paper.

Review of Manuscripts: The editor must make sure that each manuscript is initially reviewed by the editor, who can use appropriate means to evaluate the uniqueness of the manuscript 's contents and to maintain the quality of the content they publish, knowing that journals and sections within journals will have different objectives and standards.

Fair Review: Editors will aim to ensure equal, impartial and timely peer review at their publication. The editor guarantees that each received manuscript is judged on its intellectual content without regard to the age, gender, ethnicity, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors.

Privacy: The editor and any editorial staff shall not reveal any details about a manuscript sent to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, prospective reviewers, other editorial advisors and the publisher, as appropriate. The editor must maintain confidentiality of information concerning manuscripts submitted by the authors.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Before deciding to review a submission, editors would allow reviewers to report any possible conflicting interests.

AUTHORS' RESPONSIBILITIES

Reporting Standards: Researchers should describe their original research accurately, as well as analyze its purpose critically. Manuscripts are to be written according to the papers' submission guidelines. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to allow a replication of the research by others. Fraudulent or intentionally misleading claims constitute unethical conduct and are inappropriate.

Originality: Writers are expected to confirm their work is unique and original.

Redundancy: Authors must not submit papers which describe essentially the same research at the same time. Sending the same paper to more than one journal constitutes, and is unacceptable, unethical publishing behaviour.

Sources Acknowledgement: Author(s) should acknowledge all data sources used in research and cite publications which have motivated their research.

Authorship of the Manuscript: Authorship can only be limited to those who have made a substantial contribution to the creation, design , execution and analysis of the study submitted. All those who contributed significantly to the analysis are to be identified as co-authors. The corresponding author should also make sure that the final version of the document submitted and its inclusion as co-authors were seen and accepted by all the authors and co-authors.

Data Access and Retention: Authors will maintain raw data relating to their submitted manuscript and, upon editor 's request, provide it for editorial review.

Fundamental mistakes in published works: When an author finds a material mistake or inaccuracy in his / her submitted paper, the author must inform the editor promptly.

REVIEWERS' RESPONSIBILITIES

Privacy: Manuscript reviewers, the publisher and the editorial staff shall not reveal any details about the manuscripts sent to them. Any manuscripts submitted shall be regarded as privileged material. Editors will provide the reviewers with feedback on all that is required of them, including the need for secure handling of submitted content.

Sources Acknowledgement: Reviewers will guarantee that authors have recognized all data sources used in the study. Any statement previously recorded of an inference, derivation, or argument should be followed by the related quotation. Every apparent resemblance or similarity between the manuscript under review and any other published paper they have personal knowledge of should also be brought to the attention of the publisher.

Objectivity Standards: The evaluation of the submitted manuscripts must be carried out critically. The critics need to express their opinions clearly, with reasons to support them. The author's personal criticism is unacceptable.

Promptness: When a reviewer assumes that the work reported in a manuscript can not be reviewed within the prescribed criteria or within the specified period, he / she will inform the editor to guarantee timely and accurate review.

Conflict of interest: There should be no conflict of interest between all reviewers about the study, the authors and the funding agencies.

CHANGE OR MODIFICATION OF PUBLISHED PAPER

Withdrawal: If the author(s) found major mistakes, the submitted papers would be withdrawn. Editorial board and Editor-in - Chief will speak enough with the author(s) before approving withdrawal requests. If it decided to withdraw the document, the following will be implemented:

• The paper will be deleted from the journal site.
• The link will be removed from the online publishing site.
• Next sentence or equivalent phrase describing the reason will be displayed in the Table of Contents and Journal volume page below the paper title: (This paper was withdrawn due to certain technical errors).

Substitution: Published articles may be substituted if an revised paper is forwarded by the author(s). Until considering a recommendation for a change, the editorial board and the editor-in - chief should talk enough with the author(s), and at least three reviewers should verify the progress. If it had agreed to replace the paper, the following would be implemented:

• The paper will be replaced in the journal archive.
• The link will be replaced in the online publication section.
• Next sentence or similar sentence stating the reason will be shown in the Table of Contents and Journal Volume page below the paper title: (This paper has been replaced because the author(s) has sent an updated version. Contact editor if you wish to check the old version).
• New version should be kept separately, and the author should give the PDF to him / her if anyone decides to test out the old version.
• Please notice that substitution is only permissible once, and only for technological advances.

Deletion: If authors, writers, librarians, publishers or other subjects found major mistakes or plagiarism, the published papers would be discarded. Before deleting a article, the editorial board and editor-in - chief should communicate enough with writers and should have ample time to clarify the writers. If the paper was decided to be withdrawn it will incorporate the following:

• The paper will be removed from the journal database.
• The link will be removed from the website for online publication.
• Next sentence or equivalent phrase explaining the reason will be displayed in the Table of Contents and Journal volume page below the paper title: (This paper was withdrawn due to plagiarism).

PENALTIES

Double Submission:If the double submission was found or reported by other sources the status would be reviewed by the editorial board. Where the double submission has been confirmed as deliberate,

• The evaluation process will be terminated.
• Reviewers, editorial board and writers should be given the explanation for this.
• The name of all writers will be classified as blacklist, and these writers will not be able to submit a paper for three years to all Bharat Publication journals.

Dual Publication: If the dual publication was detected or reported by other outlets the status would be reviewed by the editorial board. If the double publication has been verified as being deliberate,

• Submit it to the editorial board and author(s).
• A similar (or somewhat similar) paper will be submitted to publisher.
• Paper will be removed in Section 4 as per "Removal" section.
• The name of all writers will be classified as blacklist, and these writers will not be able to submit a paper for three years to all Bharat Publication journals.

Plagiarism: If plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) was figured or noticed from other channels the status should be checked by the editorial board. If the plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) has been reported as being deliberate,

• The editorial board and the writers will be aware of this.
• It will be sent to publisher who has published a similar or the same article.
• Paper will be removed in Section 4 as per "Removal" section.
• The name of all authors will be marked as blacklist, and for five years these authors will not be able to submit paper to all Bharat Publication Journals.

PEER REVIEW POLICY

• The peer review implementation is intended to ensure that only reputable information is written. It is an objective practice at the heart of respectable academic publishing and all credible scientific journals carry out it.
• Evaluation of original manuscript: The Editor assesses all manuscripts first. It's rare but at this point, an exceptional manuscript may be accepted. Rejected manuscripts at this point are insufficiently original, have significant research errors, have bad grammar or English language, or are outside of the journal's aims and scope. Those that meet the minimum requirements are usually forwarded for analysis to at least 2 experts.
• Type of Peer Review Policy employs is double-blind review, in which both the referee and the author stay unnamed all through procedure.
• The time it takes for the review process will depend on the referees' response. Whether the reports of the referee contradict each other or a report is excessively postponed, then a further expert opinion may be required. The Editor, decisions to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision at this stage are made on the basis of a report from only one referee.
• The decision of the Editor will be sent to the author with suggestions made by the referees which typically include the referees' verbatim comments. Revised manuscripts may be returned to initial referees, who may then order another manuscript revision.
• The analysis consists of 7 components : ( 1) Interest of the subject to the readers, (2) Originality and uniqueness of the ideas, (3) Importance of the ideas presented, (4) Sufficient evidence to support the assertions made and conclusions drawn, (5) Quality of writing(Organization, Clarity, Accuracy), (6) English Grammar, and (7) Sources and references (up-to - date, relevant, sufficient). Each of the above 7 parts should be associated with a rating from very high, high, average, low, very low.

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

Others

All Bharat Publication Editors, Readers, and Reviewers agree on principles of good ethical conduct and assume responsibility for the fulfillment of the following duties and obligations as set out in the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors.

Reference: Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Retrieved from (http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines).