- Share:
Sustainable Mining and Metallurgy follows recognized publishing ethical standards, continuously strengthens industry self-discipline, promotes academic integrity construction, adopts blind review system to strictly control the quality and content of articles, and eliminates academic misconduct such as plagiarism, unreasonable authorship, multiple submissions, and ghostwriting. Based on relevant provisions such as the Copyright Law, domestic and international publishing ethics, and CY/T 174-2019 "Definition of Academic Misconduct in Academic Publishing Standards Journals", this journal has formulated ethical policies and systems for publication, providing reference for authors, academic groups, editors, research funders, readers, and others.
Once the submitted paper is confirmed to have violated academic ethics, it will not be accepted. In addition, if it is later confirmed that a paper that has been accepted and published violates academic ethics, the journal editorial department reserves the right to revoke the paper.
1. The author's publishing ethics
1) The author shall ensure that the paper does not involve any state secrets such as politics, military, science and technology, or any sensitive issues that are not suitable for public publication, does not involve any infringement issues related to intellectual property rights, and shall not involve any language or experiments that harm animals, humans, or violate human moral ethics.
2) The author is not allowed to have a third party write the paper on their behalf; Third party submission of papers is not allowed; Do not provide false peer reviewer information.
3) Authors must have made substantial academic contributions to the paper, and we firmly oppose those who have not made substantial academic contributions from signing their names on the paper. We should ensure that the names and rankings of all authors/institutions are correct and undisputed. Once submitted, it is assumed that all authors have authorized and agreed.
4) The author should ensure that the paper is an original research result (excluding the review) and has not been publicly published domestically or internationally. The research results and data are authentic and reliable, without any issues such as forgery, tampering, plagiarism, multiple submissions, or duplicate publications. Objective evaluation should be given to the research results of others in the article, and they should be properly indexed in the paper.
5) The author should provide the complete paper copyright transfer agreement to the editorial department of this journal, ensuring that they do not submit to other publications before receiving the rejection notice from the editorial department.
6) Authors should disclose all potential economic or non economic conflicts of interest related to research results and paper writing when submitting to journals.
2. Publication Ethics of Reviewers
1) Review experts should adhere to the principles of fairness, impartiality, confidentiality, and timeliness, ensuring that manuscripts are reviewed scientifically and accurately, and able to make objective and fair evaluations. Strictly keep the review content confidential, respect the author's research results, and avoid manuscripts with vested interests.
2) When receiving a review invitation, peer reviewers assess whether their professional knowledge and research direction match the paper being reviewed. If there is a mismatch or if the review cannot be completed within the specified time, the editorial department should be informed promptly.
3) Utilize one's professional knowledge and abilities to review the originality, scientificity, and practicality of the manuscript; Provide fair evaluations on the appropriateness of research methods, the rationality of scientific research design, the accuracy of results and conclusions, and the existence of leaks, in order to assist editors in determining the selection of manuscripts; Provide detailed revision suggestions for the existing problems in the article to help the author improve the quality of the paper.
4 ) The reviewers should have no interest relationship with the authors and funders of the papers, and avoid the review of the papers with conflicts of interest.
5 ) The reviewers should timely put forward the suggestions of rejection, revision, revision and re-review of the paper, and put forward detailed amendments to the problems existing in the paper, so as to help the authors accurately understand their papers and help the editorial department to make a correct judgment on the quality of the paper.
6 ) The reviewers should keep the contents of the papers reviewed, the information of the authors and the related contents confidential, and cannot use and share the contents of the papers reviewed for purposes unrelated to the review process without authorization. The reviewers may not transfer the papers to other people ( colleagues, students, etc. ) for trial without the permission of the journal editorial department.
7 ) If the reviewer finds or suspects that there are repeated publication, plagiarism, tampering, forgery and other academic misconducts in the review process, he should inform the editorial department in time and provide relevant evidence information.
3.Editor 's publishing ethics
1 ) Strictly implement relevant national laws and regulations, and abide by academic publishing ethics and norms.
2 ) Timely, fair and impartial processing of each contribution, should only be based on the paper 's innovative, scientific, practical and other aspects and the content of the paper itself and the scope of the journal to receive the matching degree of the paper to accept or reject the decision .
3 ) Respecting the author 's research results, respecting the opinions of reviewers, not being driven by interests to interfere in the peer review process of reviewers, and ensuring that reviewers independently give review recommendations.
4 ) Keep the information of authors and reviewers confidential, keep the content of unpublished articles confidential, and avoid human manuscripts.
5 ) Editors should try their best to help authors improve the academic quality of papers, improve language expression, standardize style format, and improve reference value.
6 ) Editors should ensure that the edited manuscripts are published on time with high quality to ensure the development of journals.
7 ) Eliminate all business needs and interest exchange that are detrimental to academic ethics.
8 ) There is an obligation to investigate and communicate academic misconduct. In the event of an academic moral complaint to submit a paper or publish an article, the editor must take effective countermeasures, and the editor has an obligation to hold the author and reviewer accountable for their misconduct.
9 ) Encourage academic contention and have the obligation to respond to the author 's different views on the reviewer 's opinions.
10 ) Editors have the responsibility to avoid academic misconducts such as multiple submissions and repeated publication, and should check and review the newly submitted papers and the forthcoming papers.
11 ) The editor has the obligation to remind the author of the copyright and intellectual property issues that may arise after changing the signature, unit and its order.
12 ) Editors should ensure that the paper review is fair and reasonable. Once there is a conflict of interest or cooperative relationship due to competition and cooperation between the author, the unit, and the enterprise related to the article, the editor must propose to replace the reviewer, and the editor-in-chief or other editorial board members are responsible for the review of the paper.
4.Treatment of academic misconduct
The definition of academic misconduct papers in this journal is based on the latest national standard Academic Publishing Norms - Definition of Academic Misconduct in Journals ( CY / T174-2019 ) , including plagiarism, forgery, tampering, improper signature, multiple submissions of one manuscript, repeated publication, violation of research ethics, etc. For papers on academic misconduct, this journal will seriously deal with them, take measures such as withdrawing manuscripts, hold authors accountable, and purify the academic environment.
5.Appeal mechanism
When and only when the author has obtained sufficient information or evidence ( such as providing other factual information, correcting information, additional materials, or making complaints about conflicts of interest and unfair peer review ), this journal allows the author to make a complaint and process it according to the relevant information and evidence provided by the author.
