In order to respect the principles of COPE, LUMEN Scientific Publishing House adheres to the following ethical practices in publishing: the publication of a manuscript is done only after the ethical evaluation is completed by one or two different reviewers, who have scientifically evaluated the work and must consider at least the following aspects:
- avoiding the risk of plagiarism and respecting intellectual property;
- respect for the rights of human subjects in research;
- identifying and dealing with allegations of misconduct from research ethics;
- identifying and solving problems related to the manipulation of citations;
- disclosure of any conflicts of interest;
- withdrawal from distribution of publications.
LUMEN Association’s Research and Editorial Ethics Committee has developed this editorial ethics regulation. It is necessary, where appropriate, for the author to assume in a written statement that he or she has complied with all the rigors of informed consent in the research conducted on human subjects. Also, the ethics committee’s opinion, where appropriate, is required.
I. AVOIDING THE RISK OF PLAGIARISM AND RESPECT FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
Plagiarism is the expressing of the thoughts or words of another person as if they belonged to the author of the plagiarism, without permission from the original author, granting credit or recognition, or because of the deficiencies of correctly citing the sources. Plagiarism can take various forms, from literally “copying” to paraphrasing the work of another person. To properly determine whether an author has plagiarized, we highlight the following possible situations:
- an author may literally copy the work of another author copying word by word, in whole or in part, without permission, recognizing the original author or citing the original source. This practice can be identified by comparing the original source with the manuscript / work suspected of plagiarism;
- substantial copying implies that one author has reproduced a substantial part of another author’s work without permission, recognition or citation. The term substantial can be understood both in terms of quality and quantity, and is often used in the context of intellectual property. Quality refers to the relative value of the copied text in proportion to the work of the plagiarized author as a whole;
- paraphrasing involves taking ideas, words or phrases from a source and combining them into new sentences within the paper. This practice becomes unethical when the author does not cite or acknowledge the existence of the original work / the original author. This form of plagiarism is the most difficult form to identify.
LUMEN Scientific Publishing House expresses serious concerns regarding the right of property and avoiding plagiarism. The main responsibility lies with the published authors, once the contracts expressly stipulate the obligation, including the signing of a declaration on their own responsibility that all the materials belong to the author and that the citations are made according to the law.
In accordance with the principle of quality assurance recommended by COPE, the following practices have been developed by LUMEN Scientific Publishing House :
- the request formulated to the author to present copies prior to the publication of supporting documents for the reprint rights for illustrations, graphics, tables, etc. subject to copyright;
- adopting plagiarism detection systems (eg, software, searching for similar titles) in articles or volumes sent for publication (either in the usual editorial procedure or when suspicions are reported);
- supporting authors whose copyright has been violated or who have been victims of plagiarism;
- the willingness of authors to collaborate with the publisher to defend the rights of authors and to identify persons who do not comply with anti-plagiarism ethics (for example, requesting withdrawals or removing materials from websites), regardless of whether their journal / publisher owns the copyright.
II. RESPECT FOR THE RIGHTS OF HUMAN SUBJECTS PARTICIPATING IN RESEARCH
Regarding the observance of ethics in research on human subjects, LUMEN Scientific Publishing House and its publications respect all the principles included in the Declaration of the World Medical Association from Helsinki 2013, principles that refer to the recording and publication of research and the dissemination of results.
“Authors, publishers and editors have ethical obligations regarding the publication of research results. Authors have a duty to publish the results of their research on human subjects and are responsible for the accuracy and clarity of their reports. They should comply with the agreed rules for ethical reporting. Negative and inconclusive results as well as positive results should be published or otherwise made public. Sources of financing, institutional affiliation and conflicts of interest should be stated in the publication. Research reports that do not comply with the principles of this statement should not be accepted for publication.” AMM (2013). Declaration from Helsinki, para. 36
In addition, LUMEN Scientific Publishing House may request the author to provide a copy of the ethical opinion from the ethics committee of the institution in which the research was conducted, in order to ensure that the research participant’s informed consent is granted, the right to withdraw from the research and the confidentiality of data on subjects enrolled in the research are respected.
III. IDENTIFICATION OF NON-ETHICAL BEHAVIOR IN RESEARCH AND RESOLUTION OF CLAIMS RELATING TO THEM
The Department of Health and Human Services of the States defines the deviations from the ethics of the research as: “manufacture, falsification or plagiarism in proposing, carrying out or revising the research or in reporting the results of the research”, while the Council of Science Editors
defines “inappropriate conduct in research” as “applicable to the inadequate treatment of the subjects of the research or the deliberate manipulation of the scientific data, so that it no longer reflects the observed truth”.
In compliance with the COPE rules, LUMEN Scientific Publishing House has a duty to act in case there are suspicions of deviation or if an irregularity is brought to our attention. This obligation extends to both published and unpublished works. We adhere to the following conditions:
“Editors should not simply reject works that raise suspicions about possible misconduct. They are ethically obliged to pursue the alleged cases.
Editors should adhere to the COPE schemes, where appropriate.
Editors should first request a response from suspected offenders. If they are not satisfied with the answer, they should request the investigation of those cases by the relevant employers, institution or appropriate bodies (perhaps a regulatory body or a national integrity research organization).
Editors should make every reasonable effort to ensure that a proper investigation of alleged wrongdoing is carried out; if this does not happen, publishers should make every reasonable attempt to persist in finding a solution to this problem. This is a difficult but important duty.”
Regarding the collection, credibility and presentation of the research data, LUMEN Scientific Publishing House pays particular attention to the research methodology and how it is presented in the works submitted for publication, meaning that it will grant high importance to those statements made by scientific reviewers regarding unclear research methodologies, including by presenting the research objectives and hypotheses. Thus, LUMEN Scientific Publishing House ensures that it reduces the risk of repeated masked publishing. Any previous publication of the data or parts thereof should be mentioned in an acknowledgment. No clinical trial will be published unless the authors provide evidence of its registration.
The reports on animal experiments or studies must be in accordance with the Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals developed by the US Department of Health and Human Services, otherwise the work will not be accepted for publication.
IV. IDENTIFICATION OF MANIPULATED CITATIONS AND SETTLEMENT OF COMPLAINTS RELATING TO THEM
The practice of manipulating citations is often seen as a form of coercion, coming from publishers, editors or members of the editorial board who press authors, forcing them to add citations from the journal, in order to increase citation rates and the impact factor. Also, it is known that authors have a predisposition to self-cite their previous work and excessive citation may constitute manipulation of citations (Publication Integrity & Ethics (PIE).
LUMEN Scientific Publishing House ensures the quality of citations used in a scientific manuscript through the peer review process and thanks to its reviewers (both those in the editorial evaluation stage and those in the scientific evaluation stage). Reviewers are encouraged to check the correlation between the sources used in the text and those mentioned in the bibliography chapter. Also, in the case of identifying or suspecting the manipulation of citations, the reviewers have the duty to request further explanations regarding the usefulness of the sources in the text, as well as in the case of identifying the sources that are not required by reference to the subject approached by the author.
V. AVOIDING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
LUMEN Scientific Publishing House requests that the sources of funding for the works reported in the manuscript be fully acknowledged and that any conflicts of interest be indicated.
LUMEN Scientific Publishing House requests a declaration regarding the conflicts of interest of the authors for all the manuscripts transmitted to the journals or sent for publication in volume. The authors are asked to disclose any possible conflict of interest at the end of the manuscript. All reported conflicts of interest will be published in a separate section in the manuscript. If conflicts of interest are not reported, the mention “No conflicts of interest” will be included.
Possible conflicts of interest include financial interests related to the issues discussed in the manuscript; for example, patent ownership, data ownership, consulting, speaker fees.
V.1. FOR AUTHORS:
Proposed manuscript by an author affiliated with the same institution as one of the editors
A manuscript proposed by an author who is affiliated to the same institution as one of the editors will be taken over by one of the other editors who are not part of that institution. The other editor will select the reviewers and make all decisions on the manuscript.
Proposal of a manuscript by a member of the editor’s family or by an author whose relationship with the editor may create suspicion of subjectivism
This proposal will also be distributed to another editor. The other editor will select the reviewers and make all decisions on the manuscript. If there are any doubts, the editors will consult with each other or call on a third party, as a mediator.
V.2. FOR EDITORS:
Manuscript proposed by one of the editors
A manuscript proposed by one of the editors will be processed by one of the other editors, which is not affiliated to the same institution as the editor submitting the article. The other editor will select the reviewers and make all decisions on the manuscript. The peer review process will be organized in such a way that the author does not have access to information or the correspondence part regarding his manuscript, which is not intended for authors.
V.3. FOR REVIEWERS:
Potential conflict of interest for referrals
Before a manuscript is assigned to a reviewer, the reviewer will receive an invitation letter that includes the following paragraph: “If you know or think you know the identity of the author and if you feel that there is a potential conflict of interest in reviewing this manuscript because of your relationship with the author (for example, in terms of close friendship or conflict / rivalry) or for any other reason, please DECLARE so. By accepting this invitation, it is assumed that there is no potential conflict of interest.”
On the author page of each publisher, editor or member of the editorial board of the book series or the LUMEN journals, author pages available at www.edituralumen.ro, the complete affiliation data of these persons, as well as those financial or interest-related data that could generate conflicts of interest with their activity within LUMEN Scientific Publishing House will be made available, and these data will be updated when information is received in this regard, or at least once a year.
VI. WITHDRAWAL OF PUBLICATION FROM DISTRIBUTION
After the publication of a manuscript, as long as it is in distribution, it may be withdrawn from distribution at the request of LUMEN Scientific Publishing House ’s ethics committee, for the following reasons:
- plagiarism and copyright infringement;
- breach of confidentiality in published research;
- exposing individuals or institutions to slanderous and defamatory statements;
- at the author’s request.
VII. ANTI-PLAGIARISM CHECKING POLICIES
LUMEN Scientific Publishing House adheres to the international policies against plagiarism. LUMEN Scientific Publishing House is a member of the Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. since 2015 and uses the CrossCheck platform for plagiarism detection, including Turnitin.
Before submitting the manuscripts to the reviewers, they are first checked by an editorial team member for anti-plagiarism.
LUMEN Scientific Publishing House defines plagiarism in accordance with section I of this Code of Ethics.
In the case of passages that may raise plagiarism suspicions, the LUMEN Publishing Research Ethics and Editorial Ethics Committee formulates a point of view and, upon request of the author’s opinion, decides on the acceptance of publication or rejection from publication, respectively withdrawal of the paper suspected of plagiarism.
We are aware that there are some situations in which the software can identify suspicions that may be due to the software itself or some unintentional errors in the citation, in which case, in order to identify these situations, we will ask the author to redo the critical and bibliographic chapter.
VIII. AUTHORSHIP POLICY
LUMEN Scientific Publishing House adheres to the definitions accepted by the University of Washington, regarding the authors of scientific and scientific publications.
According to the University of Washington, “scientific and academic publications, defined as articles, abstracts, presentations at professional meetings and funding applications, provide the primary way to disseminate findings, thoughts, and analyzes of authors to the scientific, academic, and secular communities. For authors of such works, successful publication enhances funding opportunities and academic promotion, while enhancing scientific and academic achievements and professional reputation. (…)”.
According to the University of Washington, the author can be defined as the person who has made significant intellectual contributions to the scientific research. All authors should meet the following three criteria (all persons who meet these criteria should be mentioned as an author):
- Academically: it contributes significantly to the design, project, execution and / or analysis and interpretation of data.
- Authorship: participants in drafting, designing and / or organizing the manuscript from the point of view of intellectual content.
- Approval: Approves the manuscript to be published.
- An administrative relationship, the acquisition of funds, the collection of data or the general supervision of a research group is not authorized.
Lead author (first author)
In the case of publications with several authors, an author should assume the role of lead author. Even in different publications, the main author is different from the first author; In all the journals of LUMEN Scientific Publishing House , the main author is considered the first author and the corresponding author. We recognize exceptions, based on a request of all authors, that the corresponding author be mentioned as different from the main author, based on a special mention and if placed as the last author. The authors should decide to be equally responsible for the work; In this case, they will be listed in alphabetical order, recognizing that all authors have an equal contribution to the article.
Co-authors – All co-authors of a publication are responsible for:
Author: By granting the consent of the author named as the main author, the co-authors acknowledge that they meet the authoritative criteria set out above. A co-author should have participated enough in the paper to assume responsibility for appropriate sections of the content.
Approval: By granting the consent of the author named as the lead author, the co-authors acknowledge that they have reviewed and approved the manuscript.
Integrity: Each co-author is responsible for the content of all appropriate sections of the manuscript, including the integrity of any applicable research.
A person has the right to refuse the co-authorship of a manuscript if he does not meet the criteria for authoring.
After payment of the publication fee, but only after confirmation of the acceptance of the work by LUMEN Scientific Publishing House (in the form in which the work was proposed or as a result of the revision applied after the peer review), the requests for the refund of the publication fee are not accepted, except in the case in which LUMEN Scientific Publishing House is responsible for not publishing the article.
The publication fee to be paid by the author of an article proposed for publication in one of the scientific journals of LUMEN Scientific Publishing House is the fee from the moment of the original submission of the article, even if the fees subsequently change (increase or decrease as a result of some promotions of Publishing House).
The findings of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, similar content to other texts or even own texts of the author or other authors – including co-authors – greater than 10%, will lead to the exclusion of the manuscript from publication, without reimbursement of payments already made.
The financing of the publications of LUMEN Scientific Publishing House is made from the publication fees paid by the authors, from own funds of LUMEN Association, obtained from the sale of books, as well as from special funds granted by various bodies of the Romanian state, punctually, within the AFCN programs to finance the publication of books or based on the funding of scientific events of LUMEN Conference Center. On each material elaborated as a result of such financing, the source of financing will be clearly visible.
The peer-review process for sponsored supplementary issues for scientific journals is the same as the one used for the main journal, being done through the OJS platform, as well as for the usual issues. Sponsored supplementary issues are accepted solely on the basis of academic merits and interest for readers, and decisions regarding these supplements are not influenced by commercial considerations.
X. PROCEDURE BEFORE THE RREC
Any disputes between authors, between third parties and authors, between publishers or editors and between any employee of LUMEN Scientific Publishing House and authors or third parties regarding the violation of the research ethics or the publishing ethics will be resolved by the LUMEN Publishing Ethics and Research Ethics Committee, who will receive and analyze the complaints, after which he will make a decision, which he will communicate to the parties involved and, possibly, to other directly interested persons.
In order to resolve a complaint, the PEREC will be able to ask the parties involved to provide details and to provide explanations, or to submit certain documents or data.
The PEREC will be able to reject a complaint or admit it, in which case it will decide on the fate of the published material, from the refusal to publish or the publication in the transmitted form or the publication with modifications (for the unpublished works), until the material is kept in the form published, adding an acknowledgment, making withdrawals, completions or even withdrawing the work from the distribution (for the materials already published).
Also, any person who does not agree with a theory presented in a material published by LUMEN Scientific Publishing House may request the publication of a material by which to position themselves critically with the theories of the material already published, and these materials will be published insofar as they will be considered acceptable after peer review. LUMEN Scientific Publishing House receives and publishes letters to the editor and gives the possibility for any reader to post comments on the materials published on the Publishing blog, available at www.edituralumen.ro.
If there are disputes regarding the solution provided by PEREC of LUMEN Scientific Publishing House and this is not accepted by the parties, the parties or one of the parties may request the opinion of the Ethics Committee of the affiliation institution of the author (s) involved. If even after this intervention the situation is not clarified, the parties will call on the services of an authorized mediator. LUMEN Scientific Publishing House encourages in these cases that the situation should be submitted for analysis to COPE.
The notifications made by whistleblowers, whose anonymity will be ensured, will be taken into account, their identity being revealed only at the express request of a court. The publishing house will ensure that the referral made by the whistleblower is not based on bad faith, hidden interests or conflicts of interest.
Any complaint addressed to the PEREC will be resolved within 30 days from its registration, unless the request for clarification from authors, third parties or various institutions does not delay the compliance with the deadline.