Publishing Ethic
The publication ethics of Innovative Computing Perspectives (ICP) are largely based on the guidelines and standards developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). ICP expects all parties involved—authors, reviewers, and editors—to commit to these publication ethics. We do not tolerate plagiarism, data falsification, inappropriate authorship credit, or other unethical behavior. Any manuscript that does not meet the standards outlined at https://publicationethics.org/core-practices will be removed. To ensure the high quality of our articles, the Editor-in-Chief enforces rigorous peer review alongside strict ethical policies and standards, and fully withdraws articles that are not entirely original works. We use iThenticate to verify the originality of submitted content.
Relevant Responsibilities
Authors' Responsibilities
- Originality: Authors must guarantee that their manuscripts are their original work and have not been previously published elsewhere.
- Non-submission Elsewhere: Authors must ensure that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
- Conflict of Interest: Authors must notify us of any conflicts of interest.
- Citation: Authors must identify all sources used in creating their manuscript.
- Error Reporting: Authors must report any errors they discover in their manuscript.
- Hazard Identification: If the work involves chemicals, animals, procedures, or equipment with unusual hazards, authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript.
Reviewers' Responsibilities
- Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must notify us of any conflicts of interest.
- Confidentiality: Reviewers must keep information pertaining to the manuscript confidential.
- Source Verification: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research and immediately bring any similarity between the manuscript and other published papers to the Editor-in-Chief's attention.
- Rejection Information: Reviewers must bring to the Editor-in-Chief's attention any other information that may be a reason to reject publication of a manuscript.
- Unbiased Evaluation: Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts only for their intellectual content, without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
- Qualification: Reviewers who feel unqualified to review a manuscript or know that prompt review will be impossible should notify us and excuse themselves from the review process.
Editorial Board and Chief Editor's Responsibilities
- Decision Making: Based on the peer review report, the Chief Editor has the right to accept, reject, or send the manuscript back to the authors for modifications.
- Confidentiality: The Editorial Board must keep information pertaining to submitted manuscripts confidential.
- Conflict of Interest Disclosure: The Editorial Board must disclose any conflicts of interest.
- Intellectual Content Evaluation: The Editorial Board must evaluate manuscripts only for their intellectual content.
- Publication Decisions: The Editorial Board is responsible for making publication decisions for submitted manuscripts.
By adhering to these principles, ICP ensures transparency, accountability, and trust in the dissemination of materials science research. For further details, consult our Ethics Handbook or contact the editorial office at icp@gospub.com.
