American Journal of Business Science Philosophy (AJBSP)

Ethics and Code of Conduct

The subsequent section elucidates the ethical conduct expected from all entities engaged in the publication process of an article in the journal. This encompasses the author, the editorial board, the reviewers, and the publisher, adhering to the principles outlined in COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Guidelines for Ethical Code of Conduct in Journal Publication

Publishing an article in the American Journal of Business Science Philosophy is fundamental to building a cohesive and respected business knowledge network. It showcases the authors' work quality and the supporting institutions' caliber. Our peer-reviewed articles epitomize scientific methods, emphasizing the need for agreed-upon ethical standards among authors, editors, reviewers, publishers, and society.

At the American Open Science Philosophy Publisher, we hold ourselves accountable at every publishing stage, recognizing our ethical obligations and broader responsibilities. We are dedicated to ensuring that advertising, reprinting, or any commercial interests do not compromise editorial decisions.

Decisions for publication

The editor of the American Journal of Business Science Philosophy holds the responsibility of selecting the most suitable articles for publication. Decisions are driven by the validation and significance of the work for researchers and readers alike. Editors adhere to the policies established by the journal's editorial board and are bound by legal requirements concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Collaboration with other editors or reviewers may inform editorial decisions.

Fair Policy 

Editors will consistently evaluate manuscripts based solely on their intellectual content, irrespective of factors such as gender, race, religious belief, sexual orientation, citizenship, ethnic origin, or the political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff are prohibited from disclosing any information regarding a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as deemed appropriate.

Conflicts of interest

Material that remains unpublished and is disclosed within a submitted manuscript cannot be utilized in an editor's research without obtaining the express written consent of the author.

Author Responsibilities:

1. Authors must provide an accurate account of their original research, along with an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data should be accurately represented, with sufficient detail and references to enable replication of the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable.
2. Authors should provide raw data for editorial review and be willing to provide public access to such data, if possible. They should also retain the data for a reasonable time after publication.
3. Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original. Any use of others' work or words must be appropriately cited or quoted.
4. Authors should not publish essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals concurrently is unethical and unacceptable.
5. Authors must properly acknowledge the work of others and cite publications that have influenced their own work.
6. Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All significant contributors should be listed as co-authors, while others involved in substantive aspects of the research should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring appropriate co-authorship and approval of the final version of the paper.
7. Authors must disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. They should also disclose all sources of financial support for the project.
8. Authors are obligated to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher if they discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work and cooperate with them to retract or correct the paper.
9. If the research involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment with unusual hazards, authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. Any involvement of human or animal subjects must comply with ethical standards and regulations.

Editorial Responsibilities:

1. Editors must evaluate manuscripts based solely on their intellectual content, without any bias related to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.
2. Editors and editorial staff are prohibited from disclosing any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
3. Editors must not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without obtaining express written consent from the author.
4. The editorial board is responsible for deciding which submitted articles should be published. Editorial decisions should be based on the validation and significance of the work to researchers and readers. Editors may consult the journal's editorial policies and legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Collaboration with other editors or reviewers may inform these decisions.
5. Editors must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated for originality. They should organize and utilize peer review fairly and effectively. Editors should provide clear explanations of their peer review processes in the information for authors and indicate which parts of the journal undergo peer review. When selecting peer reviewers, editors should choose individuals with sufficient expertise and avoid those with conflicts of interest.

Reviewer Responsibilities:

1. Peer review aids editors in making editorial decisions and can help authors improve their papers through editorial communications.
2. Reviewers should promptly notify the editor if they feel unqualified to review a manuscript or if they are unable to complete the review in a timely manner.
3. Reviews must be conducted objectively, without personal criticism of the author. Referees should clearly express their views with supporting arguments.
4. Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential and should not be disclosed to or discussed with others without authorization from the editor.
5. Reviewers must keep privileged information obtained through peer review confidential and refrain from using it for personal advantage. They should not review manuscripts with which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.
6. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors and bring it to the editor's attention. They should also alert the editor to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published paper with which they are familiar.