The IJRA team follows the valid publication ethics and malpractice statement (PEMS), as set by the http://www.cambridge.org/core/about/ethical-standards for journal editors and author guidelines.
Plagiarism Check: Good quality plagiarism software/ tool (Turnitin / iThenticate) will be used to check similarity that would not be more than 20% including reference section. In the case of exclusion of references, it should be less than 5%.
This information is intended to provide the presentation standards to be followed by the authors to enable us to quickly process for the publication.
Format of Manuscripts
Original research findings, reports, review articles, letters, technical reports, working papers and the like, will all be considered for publication. They will be judged first and foremost by their relevance to the journal and import to the reader. We suggest all submissions be made in English.
Style and Formatting
Manuscripts written with Microsoft Word and LaTeX are both acceptable for paper submission to IJRA. All manuscripts should be written in Palatino Linotype, point 10 font. We recommend each paper be 5000 words or less. Adhering to this limit would restrict each manuscript to around 10 pages. The first page should include: manuscript title, author, co-author(s), and contact e-mail for each author. The following section would include the abstract, key words, and introduction in that order. The abstract should be limited to 300 words. The abstract should likewise be both clear and concise. Key words should be limited to 7 words or less. The introduction should outline what is already generally known and commonly accepted on the subject and what the paper will add. Abbreviations that will be used in the body of the paper can be explained here. The body of the paper would follow. It must be simple to understand, logically arranged, and coherent of the highest quality and clarity. The image quality and clarity are very important in the journal production process. Photographs should be supplied in JPEG format.
IJRA selects manuscripts throughout the year to publish. While the editorial board works hard to expeditiously process each manuscript, we cannot guarantee a date of completion for each review. Each accepted manuscript will be processed with due diligence after acceptance by the editorial board.
All papers submitted to our journals go through a rigorous review process. They are refereed by experts in said field before publication. There exist three possible outcomes for each paper submitted: acceptance, acceptance after minor changes and rejection. The Editor-in-Chief is the first to see an author's work and subsequently forwards to experts in the specific field discussed in the paper for review. After review, the Editor-in-Chief of the journal will look over the reviewer's comments. If two reviewers seem to hold opposite opinions on the same paper, the controversy will be resolved by the Editor-in-Chief. Ultimately, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision. The final decision is being one of the aforementioned possibilities: acceptance, acceptance with minor changes, or rejection of paper. The IJRA board follows proper Review policy statements, as set by the ELSEVIER PERK Publishing Ethics Resource Kit for Journal Editors.
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
The IJRA journal is committed to maintaining high standards through a rigorous peer-review together with strict ethical policies. The Editorial Board is responsible, among the other, for deciding which of the research papers/articles submitted to the journal should be published and preventing publication malpractice. Unethical behavior is unacceptable and the IJRA Team does not tolerate plagiarism in any form.
All the Editors, authors, and reviewers, within the IJRA agrees upon standards of proper ethical behavior and accept the responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities, as set by the (COPE) code of conduct http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines for Journal Editors.
1. Editors' Responsibilities
Publication Decisions: Editors should be accountable for everything published in journal and must strive to meet the needs of readers and authors. Editors ‘decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the editorial board’s reviews and paper’s importance.
Review of Manuscripts: The editor must ensures that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor, who may make use of appropriate means, to examine the originality of the contents of the manuscript and ensure the quality of the material they publish, recognizing that journal and sections within journal will have different aims and standards.
Fair Review: Editors should strive to ensure that peer review in the journal is fair, unbiased and timely. The editor ensures that each manuscript received is evaluated on its intellectual content without regard to authors’ sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc.
Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial board 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. The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Editors should require reviewers to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission.
2. Author’s Responsibilities
Reporting Standards: Authors should precisely present their original research, as well as objectively discuss its significance. Manuscripts are to be edited in accordance to the submission guidelines of the proceedings.
Originality: Authors must certify that their work is entirely unique and original.
Redundancy: Authors should not concurrently submit papers describing essentially the same research. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources: Author(s) should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have influenced their research.
Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited only to those who have made a significant contribution to conceiving, designing, executing and/or interpreting the submitted study. All those who have significantly contributed to the study should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should also ensure that all the authors and co-authors have seen and approved the final submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion as co-authors.
Data Access and Retention: Authors should retain raw data related to their submitted paper, and must provide it for editorial review, upon request of the editor.
Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her submitted manuscript, the author must immediately notify the editor.
3. Reviewers Responsibilities
Confidentiality: Manuscript reviewers, the editor, and the editorial staff must not disclose any information regarding submitted manuscripts. All submitted manuscripts are to be treated as privileged information. Editors should provide guidance to reviewers on everything that is expected of them including the need to handle submitted material in confidence.
Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. 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.
Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts will be conducted objectively. The reviewers shall express their views clearly, with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
Promptness: If a reviewer believes it is not possible for him/her to review the research reported in a manuscript within the designated guidelines, or within stipulated time, he/she should notify the editor, so that the accurate and timely review can be ensured.
Conflict of Interest: All reviewers should have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors and/or the funding bodies.
4. Change or Modification of Published Paper
Withdrawal: Papers published will be withdrawn if author(s) noticed significant errors. Before accepting withdrawal request, editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with author(s) sufficiently. If the paper was agreed to be withdrawn, the following will be implemented: The paper in journal database will be removed. The link in online publication site will be removed. Next phrase or similar phrase stating the reason will be shown below the paper title in the Table of Contents and journal volume page: (This paper was withdrawn because of some technical errors).
Replacement: Papers published can be replaced if author(s) send an updated paper. Before accepting replacement request, editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with author(s) sufficiently, and at least three reviewers should check the advances. If the paper was agreed to be replaced, the following will be implemented: The paper in journal database will be replaced. The link in online publication site will be replaced. Next phrase or similar phrase stating the reason will be shown below the paper title in the Table of Contents and journal volume page: (This paper was replaced because author(s) sent updated version. Contact editor if you want to check old version). Old version should be kept separately, and if someone wants to check old version, editor can send the PDF to him/her. Note that the replacement is acceptable only one time, and only for technical advances.
Removal: Papers published will be removed if reviewers, readers, librarians, publishers or other subjects noticed significant errors or plagiarism. Before removing a paper, editorial board and Editor in-chief should talk with authors sufficiently, and should provide enough time to have authors’ explanation. If the paper was agreed to be removed, the following will be implemented: The paper in journal database will be removed. The link in online publication site will be removed. Next phrase or similar phrase stating the reason will be shown below the paper title in the Table of Contents and journal volume page: (This paper was removed because of plagiarism).
Double Submission: If double submission was found or noticed from other sources, editorial board should check the status. If the double submission was confirmed as intentional thing, Review process will be terminated. The reason should be sent to reviewers, editorial board and authors. All authors’ name will be marked as black list, and these authors cannot submit any paper to IJRA journal for three years.
Double Publication: If double publication was found or noticed from other sources, editorial board should check the status. If the double publication was confirmed as intentional thing, This will be reported to editorial board and author(s). Paper will be removed according to the “Removal” part in Section 4. All authors’ name will be marked as black list, and these authors cannot submit any paper to IJRA journal for three years.
Plagiarism: If plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) was found or noticed from other sources, editorial board should check the status. If the plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) was confirmed as intentional thing, This will be reported to editorial board and authors. Paper will be removed according to the “Removal” part in Section 4. All authors’ name will be marked as black list, and these authors cannot submit any paper to IJRA journal for five years.