Journal Life and School is committed to fulfilling the highest standards of ethical behavior at all stages of the publication process.

We follow the guidelines set up by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and Elsevier Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK)

___________________________________________________

Editor's Responsibilities

Publication Decisions

The editor is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles shall be published.

The editor is guided by the policies of the editorial board and legal requirements regarding the protection of honor and reputation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

In making a final decision, the editor confers with other editors or reviewers.

The editor must ensure that all published articles are double-blind peer-reviewed.

The editor must encourage responsible behavior.

Fair Play

Manuscripts will be evaluated for their intellectual content without discrimination on the grounds of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality, Disclosure, and Conflicts of Interest

The editor and editorial staff must not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

The editor and editorial staff must ensure the confidentiality of the information or ideas obtained through peer review and prevent their misconduct.

Unpublished materials disclosed in the submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the author's written consent.

For more information on editors’ responsibilities, please visit COPE International Standards for Editors.

Reviewers’ Responsibilities

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

The double review helps the editor in making editorial decisions, and through the editorial communications with the author, it may also assist in improving the quality of the paper.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Confidentiality

Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the review process and any information supplied by the editor or author.

Any manuscript received for a review must be treated as a confidential document; it must not be shown to or discussed with others without the editor's authorization.

Copies of the manuscript are not allowed to be retained.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify and alert the editor to any relevant published or submitted content substantially similar to or overlapping with that under review that has not been cited by the author/s. Any statement, observation, derivation, or argument that had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative, or other relationships between the reviewer and author/connected to the papers).

For more information on reviewers’ responsibilities, please visit  COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers   

Author/s' Responsibilities

Reporting Standards

Author/s of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed, as well as an objective discussion of its significance.

Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper.

A paper should contain sufficient detail and supporting references.

Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data obtained in the research.

Originality and Plagiarism

The author/s should ensure that they have written an entirely original paper that strictly follows the rules of scientific methodology, and if they have used the research and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

The author guarantees that all the research in the submitted manuscript is original and is not under consideration or accepted for publication elsewhere.

In an effort to ensure the highest ethical standards and academic quality, the originality of the content of all submissions considered for publication in proceedings is verified using the Turnitin screening service. By submitting the manuscript, the author agrees to all necessary originality checks that the manuscript may have to undergo during the evaluation or the production process.

Copyright

The author/s should confirm that the submitted manuscript does not infringe upon any copyright regulations.

The author/s should obtain copyright permission, where necessary, to reproduce any content from other sources. The Editorial Board does not bear any responsibility for verifying copyright permissions provided by the author/s. Any breach of copyright laws will result in rejection of the submitted material or its retraction after publication. Furthermore, the submitted manuscript should not contain any libelous, defamatory, obscene, or unlawful material.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one publication. Submitting the same manuscript concurrently to more than one publication constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Author/s should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

The authorship of the paper must be accurately represented. This includes ensuring that all individuals credited as authors participated in the actual authorship of the work and that all who participated are credited and have given consent for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any potential conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript, for example, if there is a competing interest (real or apparent) that could be considered or viewed as exerting an undue influence on the author’s duties at any stage during the publication process.

All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to publish an erratum, addendum, corrigendum notice, or to retract the paper, where this is deemed necessary.

For more information on authors’ responsibilities, please visit  COPE International Standards for Authors.

Procedures for Dealing with Unethical Behavior

Identification of Unethical Behavior

Misconduct and unethical behavior may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time by anyone.

Whoever informs the editor or publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated.

All allegations should be taken seriously and treated the same way until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.

Investigation

An initial decision should be taken by the editor, who should consult with or seek advice from the publisher, if appropriate.

Evidence should be gathered while avoiding spreading any allegations beyond those who need to know.

Breaches

Minor misconduct might be dealt with without the need for outside expert consultations. The author should be given the opportunity to respond to any allegation in any event.

Serious misconduct might require that the employers of the accused be notified. The editor, in consultation with the publisher or Society as appropriate, should make the decision whether or not to involve the employers, either by examining the available evidence themselves or by further consultation with a limited number of experts.

Outcomes (in increasing order of severity; may be applied separately or in conjunction)

• Informing or educating the author or reviewer where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.
• A more strongly worded letter to the author or reviewer covering the misconduct and as a warning to future behavior.
• Publication of a formal notice detailing the misconduct.
• Publication of an editorial detailing the misconduct.
• Imposition of a formal embargo on contributions from an individual for a defined period.
• Reporting the case and outcome to a professional organization or higher authority for further investigation and action.

For details on dealing with unethical behavior, please visit  Elsevier Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK)