Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
(Based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)

Ethical Guidelines for publishing in the publications of The Scientific Indian
The Newsletter of The Scientific Indian strives to bring the industry and academia closer by incorporating articles from both the academia and industry. Its articles are peer reviewed by specialist from diverse backgrounds. It reports on events and subjects of interest in both the academia and industry from around the country.
Our ethics statements are based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Duties of Authors

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 date should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient details and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective.

Data access and retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review.

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 and quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, redundant and concurrent publication
An author in general should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must alwaus be given. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.

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 substantative aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and human and animal subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for the experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be respected.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantative 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.

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. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Duties of Editors

Publication decisions
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play
An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors.

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.

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. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations
An editor should take reasonably responsible measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher. Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.

Duties of Reviewers

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. Peer review is essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method.

Confidentiality
Any manuscript received for review must be treated as confidential documents.

Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

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.

Disclosure and conflict of interest
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer;s own research without the express written consent of the author.