Journal of Hydrosciences and Environment (JHE) is following of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and complies with the highest ethical standards in accordance with ethical laws. https://publicationethics.org/
Authors, reviewers, editorial board and the editor-in-chief of the journal are obliged to be aware of the best practices and codes of conduct in publishing an article and act in accordance with them.
Submission of an article by the authors, peer review by the reviewers and acceptance or rejection of the article by the editorial board suggest being aware and dedicated to the ethics policy and in cases that misconduct on behalf of any of these parties is proved, the journal is entitled to any legal action. The publication ethics guide approved by the research and technology office of The Ministry of Science, Research and Technology should be the authors’, reviewers’ and publishing officials’ guideline.
The submitted articles should be in the specialized field of the journal and scientifically written and integrated in accordance with the journal’s manuscript guidelines
The articles must be the result of original research conducted by the authors and proper
reference to others’ works must be provided. The research has to be conducted with accuracy and observation and the data should be accurately reported.
The authors are held responsible for the accuracy and reliability of the contents of the articles and they are obliged to ensure the validity of the articles. The publication of an article does not reflect the verification of the contents by the journal.
The authors are obliged to refrain from “research and publication misconduct” as will be explained in part 3.
The authors are not entitled to “duplicate submission” of an article. In other words, they must ensure that the manuscript has not been published previously (partly or in full) or is not under consideration for publication either inside or outside Iran.
The authors are not entitled to “overlapping publication” which means; re-use of data and findings of previous articles with minor changes in an article under a new title.
The authors are obliged to perform accurate citation on the occasion that they need to use other researchers’ works, and they need to make sure permissions are secured for material that is copyrighted. In case of quoting another researcher, quotation marks are used for verbatim copying of material.
The author in charge is strongly advised to ensure the correct submission of the authors’ names and information and that no names are included except for the authors contributing to the research and writing of the article.
The author in charge has to ensure that all the authors have studied the article and unanimously agree with the presentation of the article and their contribution.
Submission of an article means that the authors have been granted the consent of the financial or venue sponsors and have introduced all the sponsors of the article.
The authors are obliged to immediately inform the journal at any time they become aware of any errors or inaccuracy in their article and either modify or withdraw their article.
The authors are expected to reserve the samples and raw data used in the article for at least one year after publication of the article to be able to respond to any potential questions proposed by the readers of the journal.
Any dangers posed to human beings or the environment through this research must be clarified in the article.
The authors are expected to cooperate with the journal in the peer review of other researchers’ articles in the corresponding specialized fields.
copying the expression of ideas, similarity in the structure of writing or presenting others’ ideas and results without proper citation, or introducing it as an authentic scientific research.
v Reviewers collaborate with the editor-in-chief and the editorial board of the journal in the quality, content and scientific assessment of the articles, and contribute to the improvement of the quality and contents of the authors’ articles via the journal.
v The selected reviewer is obliged to inform the journal’s editor-in-chief of their decision about acceptance or rejection of the review request (due to unrelated field, time shortage, etc.) immediately after reading the abstract. The reviewer is also expected to aid the editor-in-chief to select a replacement for the reviewer.
v Professionally, the reviewer has to be an expert in the field of the article. The reviewer should not accept peer review of articles outside his/her field of expertise. It is also advisable that the reviewer refrains from accepting articles with subjects on which he/she has major disagreement and may not be able to provide a fair assessment.
v The reviewer may not accept the articles which serve the benefits of individuals, institutes or certain corporations or when personal interests are taken into account.
v The reviewer may not accept articles which he/she has had a role in conducting, analyzing or writing of.
v After accepting to review the article, the reviewer is responsible to provide the editor-in-chief and the authors with his specialized and constructive opinions very clearly including necessary documents if needed, in the assigned time limit. The thorough examination of the references, tables, illustrations and other attachments of the article are also the responsibility of the reviewer.
v The review of the articles must be based on scientific study and reasoning and imposing personal, professional, racist, religious, etc. tastes and interests must be avoided.
v The reviewer is expected to provide the editor and the authors with his assessment of the weaknesses and strengths of the article in a constructive, clear and educational manner accompanied by the analysis of the weak and strong points and offer suggestions to improve the article.
v The reviewer is expected to be responsible, accountable, punctual, truth-seeking, interested and dedicated to professional ethics and individual rights. Referring to valid related documents, fairness, courtesy, avoidance of prejudice, and quick judgment, accompanied by clear statements for the editor-in-chief about the suitability of the article for publication in the journal are other attributes of the reviewers.
v If the article is written based on the guidelines and is flawless, the reviewers are expected to avoid corrections and requests for revision based on their personal taste and preferences. The reviewers must remember that the journal is in need of their scientific expertise and not editing capabilities.
v The reviewers are responsible to ensure that referencing to all of the researches, subjects, citations and quotations is done thoroughly and accurately. They are also expected to notify the authors of the related published researches that have not been referred to in the article.
v The reviewer must consider all the information in the article confidential and refrain from making it available to or discussing it with others.
v The reviewer is not authorized to use the data or concepts provided in the article in favor of or
against his own or others’ researches before the publication of the article, or use it to criticize or discredit the authors. In addition, after the publication of the article the reviewer is not allowed to disclose any details about the article beyond what has been published by the journal.
v The reviewer is not authorized to assign the responsibility of peer review of the article to another person including other faculty members or post-graduate students without consent of the editor- in-chief. The name of any individual who has assisted the reviewer in the review process has to be mentioned in the review report to the editor-in-chief and recorded in the article documents.
v The reviewer is not allowed to be in direct contact with the authors regarding the articles under review. Any form of contact with the authors will be done through the journal office.
v The reviewers are expected to pay special attention to reporting “research and publication misconduct” and provide the related documents to the editor-in-chief.
ethics. It is also expected to respect the authors’ request of not having their article reviewed by certain reviewers if the reason is well-founded.
reviewers’ expert opinion and assessment of their credibility, and scientific documents and sufficient reasoning; and there is no room for imposing personal taste and professional, racial and religious bias.
if necessary, take measures based on the process of taking action against ‘research and publication misconduct’ included in this guide.
These responsibilities include:
conflict of interests, author’s responsibilities, the editor-in-chief and the editorial board, the review process and decision making, reassessment requests and objections, preservation of the scientific documents of the review process, protection of the authors’ and reviewers’ information, modification or omission of the published articles, mediating between the plaintiffs and the
accused in a “research and publication misconduct” case.
publication misconduct” of the authors’ provided there is reasonable evidence.
Conflict of interest
Objectivity and impartiality of the individuals involved in scholarly publication should not be harmed by professional, financial, commercial or personal rivalries; otherwise, a potential conflict of interest may arise. A conflict of interest often, but not exclusively, arises for an individual between two competing interests such as interests of public duty and private interests. TPNMS requires disclosure of all known or hidden sources of funding used by the authors in a direct relation to their research. A submitted manuscript cannot be published without a conflict of interest statement. If there are no conflicts of interest known by the authors, the authors should state “The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.”