Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics of Sami Publishing Company

This publication ethics is a commitment that draws up some moral limitations and responsibilities of research journals. The text is adapted according to the “Standard Ethics”, approved by the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology, and the publication principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Manuscript Assessment

All manuscripts are subject to peer review and are expected to meet standards of academic excellence. If approved by the editor, submissions will be considered by peer-reviewers, whose identities will remain anonymous to the authors.

Our Research Integrity team will occasionally seek advice outside standard peer review, for example, on submissions with serious ethical, security, biosecurity, or societal implications. We may consult experts and the academic editor before deciding on appropriate actions, including but not limited to: recruiting reviewers with specific expertise, assessment by additional editors, and declining to further consider a submission.



Authors, Reviewers, editorial boards, and editor-in-chiefs ought to know and commit to all principles of research ethics and related responsibilities. manuscript submission, review of reviewers, and editor-in-chief's acceptance or rejection, are considered journals law compliance otherwise the journals have all the rights.


Authors Responsibilities

  • Authors should ensure that they have written their original work/research. Their works/research should also provide accurate data, underlying others' references.
  • Authors are responsible for their works' accuracy.

        Note 1: Publishing an article is not known as acceptance of its contents by the journal.

  • Duplicate submission is not accepted. In other words, none of the article's parts shouldn't carried on reviewing or published elsewhere.
  • Overlapping publication, where the author uses his/her previous findings or published date with changes, is rejected.
  • Authors are asked to have authors' permission for an accurate citation. When using one direct speech, a quotation mark (“   ”) is necessary.
  • The corresponding author should ensure the complete information of all involved authors in the article.

         Note 2: Do not write the statement of “Gift Authorship” and do not omit the statement of “Ghost Authorship”.

  • The corresponding author is responsible for the priorities of co-authors after their approval.
  • Paper submission means that all of the authors have satisfied whole financial and local support and have introduced them.
  • The author(s) is/are responsible for any fault or inaccuracy of the article and in this case, journal authorities should be informed immediately.
  • Author(s) is/are asked to provide and reserve raw data one year after publication, in order to be able to respond to journal audiences' questions.


Research and Publication Misconduct

The author(s) should avoid research and publication misconduct. If some cases of research and publication misconduct occur within each step of submission, review, edition, or publication, journals have the right to legal action. The cases are listed below:

  • Fabrication: Fabrication is the practice of inventing data or results and reporting them in the research. Both of these misconducts are fraudulent and seriously alter the integrity of research. Therefore, articles must be written based on original data, and the use of falsified or fabricated data is strongly prohibited.
  • Falsification: Falsification is the practice of omitting or altering research materials, equipment, data, or processes in such a way that the results of the research are no longer accurately reflected in the research record.
  • Plagiarism: Plagiarism is the act of taking someone else's writing, conversation, idea, claims, or, even citations without any acknowledgment or explanation of the work producer or speaker.
  • Wrongful Appropriation: Wrongful appropriation occurs when the author(s) benefits from another person's efforts and after a little change and manipulations in the research work, publish it on his/her own definitions
  • False Attribution: It represents that a person is the author of work but she/ he was not involved in the research.

Reviewers' Responsibility

Reviewers must consider the followings:

  • A qualitative, contextual, and scientific study in order to improve articles' quality and content.
  • To inform the editor-in-chief when accepts or rejects the review and introduce an alternative.
  • Should not accept the articles which consider the benefits of persons, organizations, and companies or personal relationships; also the articles which she/he, own, contributed in its writing or analysis.
  • The reviewing must be carried out upon scientific documents and any self, professional, religious, or racial opinion is prohibited.
  • Accurate review and declaration of the article's strengths and weaknesses through a clear, educational, and constructive method.
  • Responsibility, accountability, punctuality, interest, ethics adherence, and respect for others' rights.
  • Not to rewrite or correct the article according to his/her personal interest.
  • Be sure of accurate citations. Also reminding the cases which haven't been cited in the related published research.
  • Avoid of express the information and details of articles.
  • Reviewers should not benefit from new data or content in favor of/against personal research; even for criticism or discrediting the author(s). The reviewer is not permitted to reveal more details after a reviewed article is published.
  • Reviewer is prohibited to deliver an article to another one for reviewing except with permission of the editor-in-chief. The reviewer and co-reviewer's identification should be noted in each article's documents.
  • Reviewer shouldn’t contact with the author(s). Any contact with the authors should be made through the editorial office.
  • Trying to report “research and publication misconduct” and submitting the related documents to editor-in-chief.


Editorial Board Responsibilities

  • Journal maintenance and quality improvement are the main aims of the editorial board.
  • The Editorial Board should introduce the journal to universities and international communities and publish the articles of other universities and international societies on their priority.
  • The Editorial Board must not have a quota and excess of their personal article publishing.
  • The Editorial Board is responsible for selecting the reviewers as well as accepting or rejecting an article after reviewers' comments.
  • The Editorial Board should be well-known experts with several publications. They ought to be responsible, accountable, truthful, adhere to professional ethics, and contribute to improving journal aims.
  • The Editorial Board is expected to have a database of suitable reviewers for the journal and to update the information regularly.
  • The Editorial Board should try to aggregate qualified moral, experienced, and well-known reviewers
  • The Editorial board should welcome deep and reasonable reviews, prevent superficial and poor reviews and deal with one-sided and contemptuous reviews.
  • The Editorial Board should record and archive the whole review's documents as scientific documents and keep confidentially the reviewers' names.
  • The Editorial Board must inform the final result of the review the corresponding author immediately.
  • The Editorial Board should keep the article's contents confidential and not disclose its information to others.
  • The Editorial board ought to prevent any conflict of interests due to any personal, commercial, academic, and financial relations which may impact on accepting and publishing of the presented articles.
  • The editor-in-chief should check each type of research and publication misconduct that reviewers report seriously.
  • If research and publication misconduct occurs in an article, the editor-in-chief should omit it immediately and inform indexing databases or audiences.
  • In the case of research and publication misconduct, the editorial board is responsible to represent a corrigendum to audiences rapidly.
  • The Editorial Board must benefit from audiences' new ideas in order to improve publication policies, structure, and content quality of articles.



  1.  “Standard Ethics”, approved by Vice-Presidency for Research & Technology, the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology
  2. Committee on Publication Ethics, COPE Code of Conduct,