Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement (PEMS)
International Journal of Contemporary Architecture The New ARCH is encouraging the best standards of publication ethics and is taking all measures against publication malpractices. The New ARCH is following the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines as defined by the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE). For more details, please visit the link
All involved parties are expected to follow the standards of ethical behaviour.
Responsibilities of Editors
Carrying out their expected duties, editors act objective and fair;
All submitted manuscripts will be evaluated only on the basis of their academic value and its relevance to the scope of the Journal, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish the submitted manuscript are determined only by the Journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the Journal and the timing;
Editors and editorial staff will not share any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher;
Editors will not use any unpublished information from a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written permission. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors from handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. In case of interest’s conflict resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other connections between editor and authors, the editor will hand over the manuscript to be handled by another member of the editorial board;
The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo blind peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the specific field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible to decide which of the submitted manuscripts will be published, based on the work validation, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may consult other editors or reviewers in making this decision;
Editors will take responsive measures to a submitted manuscript or published paper if ethical concerns appear. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour will be investigated, no matter when the publication has been accepted or published. Editors will follow the COPE Flowcharts when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct (https://publicationethics.org/files/Full%20set%20of%20English%20flowcharts_9Nov2016.pdf). If the ethical concern is well founded, a correction, retraction, expression of concern or other note, will be published in the Journal. If simple error or misconduct are confirmed, a correction, retraction, or other note will be published in the Journal;
Editors will handle submissions for sponsored content or special issues in the same way as regular submissions, considering only the academic value and without commercial influence;
Editors have a duty to act if any misconduct is suspected and to ensure the integrity of the academic record;
Editors will implement and follow reasonable procedures if complaints of an ethical or conflict nature appears and they will give authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to any complaints;
Editors will publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.
Responsibilities of Reviewers
Blind-Peer review is an essential and obligatory for the Journal The New ARCH. Peer review helps editors to make decisions and to comment authors how to improve their manuscripts;
Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible, should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review;
Any manuscripts received for review will be treated confidently, will not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation;
Reviews has to be written objectively and clearly formulated with supporting arguments, which help authors to improve the manuscript;
Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate;
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be relevant cited. A reviewer should notify the editors of any similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published or unpublished manuscript of which they have personal knowledge;
Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from any relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation;
Unpublished material in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Responsibilities of Authors
The manuscript publication fee in the Journal is 300 USD per paper;
Authors of the original research should present precisely the contribution of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussions of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient details and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be objective and comprehensive. All editorial materials containing editors’ viewpoint should be clearly identified. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are considered to be unethical behaviour and are unacceptable;
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if possible. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication, provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release;
Authors should ensure that they have written and submitted only completely original works. Work, publications that have been influential and/or statements of others have to be appropriately cited. Any form of plagiarism (e.g. "passing off" another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper – without attribution – claiming results from research conducted by others, etc.) is considered to be unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable;
Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one Journal issue. Submitted paper must not be published in another journal. Submission of the same paper to more than one journal is considered to be unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable;
Only persons who meet all following authorship criteria should be listed as authors/co-authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: 1. Made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; 2. Drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and 3. Have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made contributions to the submitted manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section after their written permission to be named. The corresponding author should ensure that only appropriate co-authors are included in the authors’ list and verify that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication;
By manuscript submission, authors should admit any conflicts of interest that might appear to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed;
Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, unless they have obtained the written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services;
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutions have approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement to this effect. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed;
Authors are obliged to cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of “minor / major revision needed”, authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments thoroughly and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the Journal by the written deadline;
When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the Journal’s editors or publisher and to cooperate with them to either correct the paper or to retract it. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the Journal editors of the correctness of the paper.
Responsibilities of Publisher
The publisher is involved in handling of unethical publishing behaviour. In cases of scientific misconduct, plagiarism, or fraudulent publication, the publisher (with the editors), will clarify the situation and take actions including publication of an erratum, correction or even the retraction. The publisher and the editors will prevent the publication of fraudulent papers and will not allow misconduct;
Publisher will publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.