Peer Review, Publication Ethics, and Malpractice Statement
Peer Review Process
The Academians Journal of Natural and Biosciences Studies (AJNBS) evaluates submissions on the premise that manuscripts are original, have not been published previously, and are not under consideration elsewhere. All listed authors must approve the final version and disclose any potential conflicts of interest. Authors are also expected to comply with ethical research standards, including obtaining the necessary approvals from ethics committees where applicable. Any concerns related to research misconduct will be addressed following international ethical standards, including the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.
AJNBS follows the editorial guidelines laid out by the Council of Science Editors and adheres to globally recognized standards in biomedical publishing. Editors, authors, and reviewers are expected to maintain integrity and transparency throughout the review and publication process.
All submitted manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer review. Each article is first assessed by the editorial board, followed by evaluation from at least two independent reviewers who are subject-matter experts. Peer reviewers are selected for their expertise and academic contributions in the relevant field, both nationally and internationally.
Ethical Considerations in Human and Animal Research
Research involving human participants must comply with the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki (latest revision). Studies involving human subjects must include approval from a recognized ethics committee and should state that informed consent was obtained from participants. This information must be included in the “Materials and Methods” section.
For studies involving animals, authors must confirm that the research was conducted in accordance with relevant institutional and international guidelines, such as the “Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.” Ethical approval from an animal ethics committee must also be provided.
Where applicable, case reports or identifiable data involving minors (under 18) require written consent from both parents or legal guardians.
Plagiarism and Research Misconduct
The AJNBS editorial team utilizes reliable plagiarism detection software to ensure the originality of submitted work. Manuscripts found to contain plagiarism, excessive similarity (>15%), data fabrication, duplicate publication, or unethical authorship practices will be rejected and may be reported to relevant authorities.
Common forms of misconduct include:
Plagiarism: Using content from another work without appropriate citation
Fabrication: Inventing data or findings
Duplication: Re-publishing the same data or study
Salami Slicing: Fragmenting research to produce multiple publications from a single dataset
Data Falsification: Manipulating or altering results
Authors are required to disclose previous presentations or publications of the data (e.g., in abstract form).
Use of AI and Generative Technologies
AI tools cannot be listed as authors and are not responsible for the scientific content. If any AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, image generators) were used in the preparation of the manuscript, their use must be declared clearly. This includes use in data analysis, writing assistance, or image creation.
A declaration titled “Declaration Regarding the Use of AI and AI-Assisted Technologies” should be included. If no AI tools were used beyond standard spelling or grammar checkers (e.g., Grammarly, Mendeley), no statement is required.
Example Statement: “During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors utilized [TOOL NAME] to [explain how it was used and how outputs were verified]. The authors reviewed and edited all content, and take full responsibility for the final publication.”
Publisher’s Responsibilities
AJNBS is published by Academiansedu, which upholds high standards of publishing integrity. In cases of confirmed research misconduct, plagiarism, or ethical violations, the publisher will collaborate with the editorial board to issue corrections, retractions, or explanatory notes.
The publisher ensures editorial independence and will not influence editorial decisions for commercial or political gain. Intellectual property rights and copyright for all published materials are protected and maintained transparently.
Editorial Responsibilities
Editors are responsible for overseeing the entire review process and ensuring all manuscripts are assessed fairly and independently. Manuscripts are evaluated based on scholarly merit alone, without discrimination based on authors’ background, institution, or personal beliefs.
Confidentiality is strictly maintained throughout the review process. Editors are prohibited from using any unpublished materials for personal benefit without the explicit consent of the authors.
In cases where an editor is an author on a submitted manuscript, they are removed from the review and decision-making process to maintain impartiality.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers are expected to:
Provide unbiased, constructive feedback
Maintain confidentiality of manuscripts
Disclose any conflicts of interest
Notify the editor of any ethical concerns or suspected misconduct
Suggest relevant literature that authors may have missed
Author Responsibilities
Authors must ensure that:
Manuscripts are original and not under review elsewhere
Data is reported accurately and in full
All sources are properly cited
All contributors are properly acknowledged
Conflicts of interest and funding sources are disclosed
Authors should avoid redundant or duplicate submissions. The corresponding author must confirm that all co-authors approve the final version and have agreed to its submission.
In the event of errors in a published article, authors are required to notify the editorial office promptly so that a correction or retraction can be issued if necessary.
Appeals and Complaints
Authors may appeal editorial decisions by providing a detailed justification. Appeals must be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief via the journal’s official contact email. All complaints and appeals are handled in alignment with COPE guidelines and are subject to final review by the editorial board.