Publishing Ethics Statement
The Journal of Changjiang River Scientific Research Institute always adheres to strict manuscript review and editing systems, and is committed to publishing high-quality papers with complete content. In order to strengthen the academic integrity of the Journal, regulate the process of paper writing, reviewing, editing, and publishing, and resist academic misconduct, the Journal has formulated the “Ethics Policy and Statement” for authors, peer review, and editorial staff based on the Copyright Law, the Definition of Academic Misconduct in Journal Publications (CY/T 174—2019), and the new version of the Transparency and Best Practice Guidelines issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
The Journal is willing to work together with authors and readers to resist academic misconduct, purify the academic atmosphere, and create a standardized, healthy, and positive academic environment. We welcome strict supervision from authors and readers and encourage those with knowledge of academic misconduct to report such behavior. We will resolutely punish and crack down on academic misconduct.
Editorial Code of Ethics
1. Editors should adhere to a rigorous and scientifically objective attitude throughout all stages of editing and proofreading to ensure the publication of high-quality manuscripts on time.
2. Editors have an obligation to safeguard and keep confidential all materials related to the review and revision stages, ensuring that the information contained in submitted manuscripts cannot be used for personal or third-party research by the editor.
3. Editors should ensure the fairness and impartiality of paper review, protect the identity of reviewers, authors, and other relevant information during the blind review process.
4. Manuscripts should be selected based on originality, importance, clarity, relevance to the journal’s mission and scope, and not on personal relationships, commercial interests, or any actions that will do harm to academic ethics.
5. Editors should respect the author’s viewpoints and writing style, and obtain the author’s consent for any critical changes made to the academic perspective or other aspects of the paper.
6. Editors are responsible for responding to authors’ differing views on reviewers’ opinions and encouraging academic debate.
Author’s Code of Ethics
1. Authors have an obligation to declare that the paper does not involve state secrets and does not infringe upon any intellectual property rights.
2. Multiple submissions are strictly forbidden. Authors may not submit the same manuscript or slightly different manuscripts to two or more journals or transfer the manuscript to another journal within the agreed deadline. The contents of the manuscript should not have been published in any other media or language. Before receiving notification of rejection, the author should not submit the paper to other publications. If the author wishes to publish elsewhere, they must contact the editorial office to withdraw the manuscript.
3. Plagiarism is strictly prohibited. Authors have the responsibility to ensure the originality of their submitted papers (with the exception of reviews) by clearly citing all used viewpoints, data, figures, research methods, written expressions, unpublished results, or complete works from other references, and including references in the reference list.
4. Authorship should be limited to individuals who make substantial intellectual contributions to academic ideas, research programs, or specific research work. Third-party writing or manuscript submission is not allowed, and nominal authorship is firmly opposed. Funding sources and consultants who provide science support to the manuscript can be acknowledged. The submission of a signed copyright transfer agreement by all authors is required for manuscript submission.
5. Authors should not deliberately fabricate or modify data and facts to distort reality. They should not use forged funding sources or other false information.
6. If authors discover any significant errors or deviations in their published papers, they should immediately contact the editorial office to withdraw or correct the paper.
Code of Ethics for Peer Reviewers
1. Peer reviewers should provide fair evaluations of the appropriateness of research methods, the rationality of scientific research design, and the accuracy of results and conclusions by presenting objective evaluations with sufficient evidence and factually clarify their views, providing detailed feedback on manuscript problems.
2. Reviewer feedback should not be influenced by the author’s nationality, gender, ethnicity, status, geographic location, or institutional affiliation
3. Reviewers should submit feedback within the specified time limit. If unable to complete within the deadline, they should explain the situation and return the manuscript. Reviewers should not entrust students, colleagues, or others to review the manuscript on their behalf.
4. All feedback and information provided by reviewers should be kept confidential, and the data, opinions, and conclusions of the reviewed manuscripts should not be used or disclosed without the author’s permission.
5. Reviewers should inform the editorial department if they find duplicate or similar content in the reviewed manuscript that has previously been published, or if they have previously reviewed the paper.
6. Reviewers should have no conflicts of interest with regard to the research, authors, or author’s institution.