Publication Ethics
The following statement explains the ethical behavior of all parties involved in publishing articles in this journal, including authors, editors, bestari partners. This statement is based on the COPE Practice Guidelines (Publications Ethics Committee) for Journals.

A. Publication

1. All papers submitted are subject to a rigorous peer-review process by at least two reviewers who are experts in a particular paper field.
2. Factors considered in the review are relevance, health, significance, originality, readability, and language.
3. Possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revision, or rejection.
4. If the author is encouraged to revise and resubmit the post, there is no guarantee that the revised post will be accepted.
5. Articles that are rejected will not be reviewed.
6. Paper acceptance is limited by legal requirements that will apply regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
7. There is no research that can be included in more than one publication.

 B. Author's Responsibility

1. Authors must state that their manuscripts are their original work.
2. The author must state that the manuscript has never been published elsewhere.
3. The author must state that the text is not currently considered for publication elsewhere.
4. Authors must participate in the peer review process.
5. The author is obliged to provide revocation or correction of errors.
6. All authors mentioned in the paper must make a significant contribution to the research.
7. The author must state that all data in this paper is real and original.
8. The author must notify the Editor about conflicts of interest.
9. Authors must identify all sources used in making their manuscripts.
10. Authors must report any errors they find in published papers to the Editor.
 

C. Reviewer's Responsibilities

1. The reviewer must keep all information about the paper confidential and treat it as special information.
2. Reviews must be made objectively, without personal criticism from the author.
3. Reviewers must express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
4. The reviewer must identify the relevant published work that has not been cited by the author.
5. The reviewer must also request that the Editor-in-Chief pay attention to the substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscripts being considered and other published papers which have personal knowledge.
6. Reviewers may not review manuscripts that have a conflict of interest as a result of competition, collaboration, or other relationships or connections with the authors, companies, or institutions connected with the paper.