Malpractice Statement

Researchers Links, a UK-based organisation, believes that research should be performed in accordance with a comprehensive and adequate ethical agenda that is generally accepted by the research community. Any problem relating to publishing ethics will be taken seriously by the Editorial Office, which reserves the right to reject the submission if it is proven, and may contact the author's institution's ethics committee or the relevant committee for further action. If writers desire to retract publications, they should send a retraction letter to the Editorial Office stating why. Authors also have the right to file a written appeal to the Editorial Office against the Editor's decision on the manuscript. We accept articles based on intellectual and ethical principles alone, not for commercial or political advantage. Prior to the processing of the manuscript for review, the Editorial Office will closely monitor for plagiarism and obvious fraudulent data, and if plagiarism is discovered at this stage or later, the manuscript will be rejected and will not be reconsidered in any journal published by Researchers Links, UK, independently or in association.

Publication Ethics

Scientific material publication is a rigorous, systematic, and complete process involving good ethical and management principles. Our publications try to cooperate with editors, authors, peer-reviewers, and copy editors to successfully maintain high publishing standards.

The publishing ethics assigned to all Researchers Links journals are based on the standards of the Committee on Publication Ethics' Code of Conduct (detailed at (Researchers Links is not yet member of COPE). These publication ethics are simply outlined to provide authors, reviewers, editors, and readers a quick overview..

  1. Author’s Responsibilities
  2. Editor/Associate Editors/Editorial Members Responsibilities
  3. Reviewers Responsibilities
  4. Publisher/Copy Editor Responsibilities
  5. Recording Complaints

Author’s Responsibilities

Authorship:  Personnel who made a major contribution to the study, drafted the article, and are responsible for the authenticity should be given authorship. Authorship does not require general oversight or financial backing. Each author's contribution should be explicitly indicated, and contributing authors should not be altered without the existing writers  prior written approval.

Acknowledgement of Funding Sources: All authors must declare clearly and honestly how much of their research was funded, supported, or sponsored by government, non-government, or personal sources.

Conflicts of Interest/Disclosures: Before the work is published, the authors must state any financial, academic, commercial, political, or personal conflicts.

Data Ownership and Access: The ownership, appropriate access, and complete knowledge of the data given in the submitted publications are required of the authors.

Reporting Standards: It is important that writers are aware of international publication standards and are qualified and authorised to conduct research on living objects. Furthermore, writers must be well aware of the procedures for repeated, duplicate, or contemporaneous publishing, as well as the repercussions of these activities.

Ethical Approvals: When animals are employed in the submitted publication, the methods section must explicitly express approval from the institute or organization's ethical committee, as well as a statement that all attempts were made to minimise suffering and distress to the animal during the studies.

Ethics of Investigation: Otherwise, the work will not be accepted for publication or will be rejected later if it is not developed in accordance with the standards of the Helsinki Declaration as updated in 1975.

Permissions: If any component of the submitted material (for example, a table or figure) has been derived from previously published work, the writers must acquire permission from the publishers or the authors, depending on who owns the copyright. Researchers Links can request this authorization at any time, whether before or after the study is published.

Originality and Plagiarism Policy: Prior to the review process, the Editorial Office will closely monitor text plagiarism and obvious fraudulent data, and if plagiarism is discovered at this stage or later, the manuscript will be rejected and will not be considered for publication in any journal published independently or in association with Researchers Links, UK.

Appeal of Decision: Authors have the right to appeal the Editor's decision to the Editorial Office in writing, citing their reasons for appealing together with proof and supporting statistics.

Editor/Associate Editors/Editorial Members Responsibilities

Editorship: Editors (chief editor, associate editor, or member of the editorial board) are subject experts who play an important role in the peer-review process. Editors are chosen for their outstanding scientific qualifications and track record in the area. They must adhere to tight criteria in order to not only preserve publishing quality but also to assure the finest possible publication ethics.

Confidentiality: Editors will only have access to submitted papers for the purpose of assessing their quality and the peer-review process. They must not reveal any contents (full or partial) in any media (electronic or print) prior to the material's release or without the authors' prior written authorization. Any idea or notion created as a result of the manuscript's submission will not be exploited for personal gain or commercial gain.

Assessment of Manuscripts: Editors will assess content only on the basis of scientific quality and progress in current knowledge. Decisions will not be made on the basis of race, gender, geographic origin, religion, ethnicity, or any other personal or commercial interests.

Flexibility and Cooperation: Editors must propose and support ethical norms, be open to accept retractions, rectifications, and erratums, and work with authors to enhance publication quality.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: When an editor has a conflict of interest, he or she will not consider a submission for review by himself or herself. In such cases, a different associate editor or a member of the editorial board should be considered.

Accountabilities: If the publisher suspects any sort of misbehaviour, malpractice, or unethical behaviour, the situation will be examined swiftly in collaboration with the authors and resolved diligently.

Reviewers Responsibilities

Reviewership: Reviewers are an integral element of the peer-review process and serve as a barometer for high-quality articles. Reviewing a manuscript is a privilege, even though it may be tiresome and time-consuming.

Pre-acceptance Obligations: Reviewers should only agree to examine a manuscript if the topic of the research/study is within their areas of competence and they have enough time to complete the report on time.

Conflict of Interest and Willingness: If a reviewer has a conflict of interest, the study is outside their understanding, or they are unable to complete the assessment on time, they will decline to evaluate the paper. They must tell the editors as soon as possible and may/may recommend alternate reviewers.

Confidentiality: The journal uses single-blind review, which means that the names of the reviewers are not revealed to the authors, but reviewers are aware of the authors' connections. Only the submitted articles will be accessed by reviewers for the purpose of assessing quality and the peer-review process. They must not reveal any contents (full or partial) in any media (electronic or print) prior to the material's release or without the authors' prior written authorization. Any idea or notion created as a result of the manuscript's submission will not be exploited for personal gain or commercial gain.

Objectivity: Reviewers are asked to remark on the scientific substance, the study's appropriateness, and the outcome's value. They are asked not to judge the manuscripts on the basis of race, gender, geographic origin, religion, or ethnicity, as well as any other personal or economic interests.

Meeting Standards: The standards established by the journal in the online portal must be followed by reviewers. Any objections about conflicting interests, duplication of publishing, unethical practise, or doubtful behaviour should be directed to the editor using the online submission system's "confidential comments to the Editor" option.

Publisher/Copy-Editor Responsibilities

Involvement and Cooperation in the Peer-Review Process: We are dedicated to bridging all aspects of the peer-review process in order to offer high-quality publications to researchers. Advertisements, reprints, or other economic interests will have no bearing on the editors', associate editors', or reviewers' decisions.

Article Withdrawal and Corrections to the Record: If plagiarised, exhibiting phoney, duplicate, or fraudulent data, or displaying obvious proof of ethical code violations, the published publications may be considered for removal. Such articles (html, pdf, epub, eflip) will be replaced by information announcing the manuscripts' withdrawal. Corrections will be issued for minor errors such as typos, textual revisions, or clearer clarifications on the current contents.

Integrity and Quality of Services: We will ensure that all contents are kept private prior to publication, that all archiving and abstracting requirements are met, and that approved papers are published on schedule.

Plagiarism Policy: