For Authors

Authors of original research reports should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its results.

Authors submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal, publishing papers (including the whole papers presented online) describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication, or translating the published papers and dissertations are unacceptable. The repetitive rate of an original research paper should not be more than 20% generally and should not be more than 10% for its main content that presents the work novelty.

The original data and the cited data should be presented accurately in the paper which may help readers to quickly trace the previous literature that the results in this paper are based on. The information obtained privately may only be used with explicit written permission of the owners.

The reports of original research should be of integrity and should not be split in parts and published in several papers.

Authors should disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any hazards inherent in their use, authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Authorship should include those who have made contributions to the reported study essentially and be ranked by contributions. Authors take collective responsibility including academic and ethical responsibilities for the reported study.

For Reviewers

Any assigned reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a paper or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process.
   Reviews should be conducted objectively, including such aspects as the significance of the subject, theories, writing quality, interpretations, and arguments. Reviewers should respect the independence of authors’ thoughts and the enthusiasm for scientific research innovation, and should be aware of any personal bias they may have and take this into account when reviewing a paper.
    Taking full account of one’s limitations in scientific understanding, reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
    Reviewers should be alert to the ethical issues in the paper, including any academic misconduct such as missing references, misquotes, plagiarism and falsification.
    Reviewers should review the conflicts of interest before agreeing to review a paper, and notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process where they have potential conflicts of interest.
    Reviewers must treat the papers received for review as confidential documents, and must not share the review or information about the paper with anyone.
    Unpublished information disclosed in a submitted paper must not be used anywhere. A reviewer shall not suggest an author to include citations in his/her work without genuine scientific reasons.

For Editors

Editors should treat each manuscript objectively. The academic and application values without regard to race, religious belief, gender, qualification, and job title of the authors must always support decisions. Editors may review a paper’s research relevance and readability and may make decisions regarding authors’ records of unethical behavior.

Editors shall select reviewers to review papers from professional perspectives. If a study reported does not meet with the aim and scope of the journal, editors have the right to reject the article without peer review.

Except where necessary editors need to seek experts’ opinion, editors must not share the information about the paper with anyone, and use the unpublished information, argument and interpretation disclosed in a submitted paper in editors’ own research.

Editors should respect authors’ exploration and innovation sprit in research work and encourage diverse thinking. Editors should encourage authors to express academic views that differ from the existing theories and views and should especially respect authors’ research findings that differ from those in the published articles and the editors’ own research.

Editors are not encouraged to submit manuscript that he/she wrote him/herself to the journal that the editor is involved in. Any such submission must be reviewed independently of the relevant editor in avoiding conflicts of interest.

Editors should handle the submitted manuscripts in a proper time limit and timely decide which of them should be published. The time of submission should be considered when editors arrange the table of content of an issue. Editors may publish some articles and the invited articles in advance based on the column types, topic selection, and topic hotness.

Editors should remind the authors to appropriately cite the relevant publications comprehensively. Editors should remind authors that the information obtained privately may only be used with explicit written permission of the owners. Editors should remind authors of the potential conflicts of interest, including breach of confidence of the country and the relevant institutes, and infringement of legitimate rights and interests of others.