Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Iraqi Journal of Agricultural Research (IJAR)

This statement is based on the Core Practices and Guidelines developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). It outlines the ethical responsibilities of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in IJAR: the Author, the Journal Editor(s), the Peer Reviewer, and the Publisher (Directorate of Agricultural Research, Ministry of Agriculture, Iraq).

1. Duties of Editors

·  Publication Decisions: The Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board are solely responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the IJAR will be published. Decisions are driven by the scientific merit, relevance, and originality of the work.

·  Fair Play: Submitted manuscripts are evaluated without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

·  Confidentiality: The editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the publisher.

·  Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

2. Duties of Reviewers

·  Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the editors in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the authors may also assist the authors in improving the paper.

·  Promptness: Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

·  Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

·  Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

·  Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

3. Duties of Authors

·  Reporting Standards: Authors 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.

·  Data Access and Retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data if practicable.

·  Originality and Plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. (The IJAR uses Turnitin to verify authenticity).

·  Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.

·  Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.

·  Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and have been approved by the appropriate institutional committee(s).

4. Handling Allegations of Misconduct and Complaints

·      Journal’s Response to Misconduct: In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher and the editors will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe cases, the retraction of the affected work.

·      Ethical Violations: The journal is committed to follow the COPE Flowcharts when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct or disputed authorship.

 

This journal follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, https://publicationethics.org,