Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Journal of Engineering Sciences (Improsci)


1. Introduction

Journal of Engineering Sciences (Improsci) is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal dedicated to the dissemination of high-quality research in engineering and related applied sciences. The journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of ethical conduct throughout the publication process. This statement sets out the ethical principles, responsibilities, and expectations for all parties involved in the publication of articles, including authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher.

This publication ethics policy is developed and maintained by the editorial management of Improsci and is informed by internationally recognized best practices, including the principles and guidelines promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and other relevant organizations.


2. Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Authors submitting manuscripts to Improsci are required to adhere to the following ethical standards:

2.1 Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their manuscripts represent original work that has not been published previously and is not under consideration elsewhere. Any use of ideas, data, methods, or text from other works must be properly cited. Plagiarism in any form, including self-plagiarism and redundant publication, is considered unethical and unacceptable.

2.2 Accuracy and Integrity of Research Reporting

Authors are responsible for presenting an accurate, complete, and transparent account of their research. Data, methodologies, and analyses must be described in sufficient detail to allow understanding and potential replication. Fabrication, falsification, or selective reporting of data constitutes serious misconduct.

2.3 Data Availability

Where appropriate, authors should be prepared to provide access to underlying research data for editorial review or post-publication verification. Authors are encouraged to retain research data for a reasonable period following publication.

2.4 Authorship and Acknowledgement

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a significant intellectual contribution to the research. All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be properly acknowledged. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all listed authors have approved the final version of the manuscript.

2.5 Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial, institutional, or personal relationships that could be perceived as influencing the research or its interpretation. All sources of funding must be clearly stated.

2.6 Ethical Approval

For research involving human participants, animals, or sensitive data, authors must confirm that the study was conducted in compliance with applicable ethical and legal standards and that approval was obtained from the relevant ethics committee or review board, where required.


3. Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

Editors of Improsci are entrusted with ensuring the integrity and quality of the scholarly record and are responsible for:

3.1 Editorial Decision-Making

Manuscripts are evaluated solely on the basis of academic merit, originality, relevance to the journal’s scope, and clarity of presentation. Editorial decisions are made without discrimination based on personal or institutional characteristics of the authors.

3.2 Confidentiality

Editors must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. Information related to a submission must not be disclosed to anyone outside the editorial process without the authors’ explicit permission.

3.3 Conflict of Interest Management

Editors must recuse themselves from the review and decision-making process if any conflict of interest exists with respect to a submitted manuscript.

3.4 Ethical Oversight

Editors are responsible for responding appropriately to ethical concerns or allegations of misconduct and may initiate investigations in line with established editorial procedures.


4. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Peer reviewers play a vital role in maintaining academic quality and are expected to adhere to the following principles:

4.1 Objectivity and Constructive Feedback

Reviews should be conducted objectively and expressed in a clear, professional, and constructive manner, with the aim of improving the scholarly quality of the manuscript.

4.2 Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential and must not be shared or used for personal advantage.

4.3 Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must inform the editor of any conflicts of interest and decline to review manuscripts where such conflicts may compromise objectivity.


5. Handling of Research Misconduct

Improsci adopts a zero-tolerance policy towards research and publication misconduct, including but not limited to plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, duplicate submission, and inappropriate authorship practices. Allegations of misconduct will be investigated in a fair and confidential manner. Where misconduct is confirmed, the journal may take appropriate corrective actions, including manuscript rejection, article retraction, and notification to relevant institutions or stakeholders.


6. Post-Publication Corrections

The journal is committed to maintaining the integrity of the academic record. If significant errors or ethical concerns are identified after publication, Improsci may issue corrections, corrigenda, expressions of concern, or retractions, as deemed appropriate.


7. Copyright and Intellectual Property

Unless otherwise stated, authors retain copyright of their published work. By submitting their manuscript to Improsci, authors grant the journal the right to publish and disseminate the work in accordance with the journal’s publication policies.


8. Commitment to Best Practices

Journal of Engineering Sciences (Improsci) is committed to continuous improvement of its editorial policies and ethical standards. The journal aligns its practices with internationally accepted guidelines, including those of COPE, WAME, and related scholarly organizations, while maintaining independent editorial oversight and responsibility.