Core principles

  • Honesty: Research and reporting must be accurate and free from fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate manipulation.
  • Transparency: All funding, competing interests, and prior publications must be disclosed.
  • Fairness: Peer review and editorial decisions are impartial and based on scholarly merit.
  • Respect: Authors, reviewers, and editors must engage respectfully, free from discrimination or harassment.
  • Accountability: All parties are accountable for maintaining ethical standards.

Responsibilities of authors

  • Submit only original work, properly cited and free from plagiarism or duplicate submission.
  • Ensure accurate representation of data, methodology, and results.
  • Disclose funding sources, competing interests, and approvals (IRB, ethics committees).
  • Cooperate fully with peer review and respond to editorial queries in a timely manner.
  • Accept responsibility for corrections, retractions, or clarifications when necessary.

Responsibilities of reviewers

  • Provide objective, evidence-based feedback within agreed deadlines.
  • Maintain confidentiality and not use privileged information for personal advantage.
  • Declare conflicts of interest promptly.
  • Report suspected ethical issues, plagiarism, or data concerns discreetly to the editor.

Responsibilities of editors

  • Make impartial decisions based solely on academic merit.
  • Ensure fair, transparent peer review while protecting reviewer anonymity.
  • Guard against conflicts of interest in decision-making.
  • Take appropriate action when ethical concerns are raised, including corrections or retractions.

Conflicts of interest

All participants in the publishing process must disclose any relationships that could bias judgment. Editors manage conflicts by reassigning manuscripts or ensuring independent oversight. Transparency in conflict disclosure protects the integrity of the process.

Handling of allegations

Investigation workflow

  1. Allegation received and logged by the editorial office.
  2. Preliminary review to determine validity and seriousness.
  3. Request for explanation and supporting data from authors if needed.
  4. Consultation with independent experts or institutions for serious cases.
  5. Outcome: correction, retraction, or dismissal of allegation with reasons documented.

Corrections and retractions

When errors or ethical breaches are identified, ASCR publishes corrections, clarifications, or retractions as needed. Notices are linked to the original article and state clear reasons. Retractions may occur with or without a replacement version, depending on the circumstances.

Appeals and complaints

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by providing a reasoned explanation addressing review comments. Appeals are reviewed independently. Complaints about process, timelines, or conduct are handled systematically and tracked to resolution.

Contact

Questions about this policy should be directed to the editorial office through the official contact page. Include relevant details such as article title, DOI, and description of the concern.