Guidelines

Submission Guidelines (Author Guidelines)

  • File format: DOC, DOCX, RTF, or PDF. Microsoft Word documents should not be locked or protected
  • Length: There are no restrictions on word count, number of figures, or amount of supporting information. We encourage you to present and discuss your findings concisely.
  • Font: standard font and a standard font size
  • Headings: Limit manuscript sections and sub-sections to 3 heading levels
  • Layout: Manuscript text should be double-spaced.
  • Page and line numbers: 
    Footnotes: Footnotes are not permitted 
    Language: Manuscripts must be submitted in English
  • Abbreviations: Define abbreviations upon first appearance in the text. Do not use non-standard abbreviations unless they appear at least three times in the text. Keep abbreviations to a minimum

Reference style:

Equations:

Nomenclature: Use correct and established nomenclature wherever possible

Manuscript Organization: Manuscripts should be organized as follows. Instructions for each element appear below the list

  • • Units of measurement: Use SI units. If you do not use these exclusively, provide the SI value in parentheses after each value
  • • Drugs: Provide the Recommended International Non-Proprietary Name
  • • Species names: Write in italics (Write out in full the genus and species, both in the title of the manuscript and at the first mention of an organism in a paper. After first mention, the first letter of the genus name followed by the full species name may be used (e.g., H. sapiens).)
  • • Genes, mutations, genotypes, and alleles: Write in italics. Use the recommended name by consulting the appropriate genetic nomenclature database
Beginning section:
  • • Title page: List title, authors, and affiliations as first page of manuscript
  • • Abstract
  • • Introduction
Middle section:
  • • Materials and Methods
  • • Results
  • • Discussion
  • • Conclusions
Ending section:
  • • Acknowledgments
  • • References
  • • Supporting Information Captions (if applicable)
Other elements:
  • • Figure captions are inserted immediately after the first paragraph in which the figure is cited. Figure files are uploaded separately.
  • • Tables are inserted immediately after the first paragraph in which they are cited.
  • • Supporting information files are uploaded separately.

Parts of a Submission

Title:

Title should be short with 250 characters and Specific, descriptive, concise, and comprehensible to readers outside the field.

Titles should be written in title case (all words capitalized except articles, prepositions, and conjunctions). Avoid specialist abbreviations if possible. For clinical trials, systematic reviews, or meta-analyses, the subtitle should include the study design.

Author list

Author names and affiliations

  • On the title page, write author names in the following order:
  • • First name (or initials, if used)
  • • Middle name (or initials, if used)
  • • Last name (surname, family name)

Each author on the list must have an affiliation. The affiliation includes department, university, or organizational affiliation and its location, including city, state/province (if applicable), and country. If an author has multiple affiliations, enter all affiliations on the title page only. In the submission system, enter only the preferred or primary affiliation.

Corresponding author

One corresponding author should be designated in the submission system as well as on the title page.

One corresponding author should be designated in the submission system. However, this does not restrict the number of corresponding authors that may be listed on the article in the event of publication. Whoever is designated as a corresponding author on the title page of the manuscript file will be listed as such upon publication.

Include an email address for each corresponding author listed on the title page of the manuscript.

  • • If there is a consortium or group author on your manuscript, please provide a note that describes where the full membership list is available for the readers.
  • • The membership list can be listed in the Acknowledgments, in Supporting Information, or on the internet.
  • • Consortia/Group authors can have affiliations, but it is not required.

Consortia and group authorship

If a manuscript is submitted on behalf of a consortium or group, include the consortium or group name in the author list, and include the full list of members in the Acknowledgments or in a Supporting Information file.

The corresponding author is responsible for making sure all authors approve the final manuscript before submission. Publisher will contact all authors by email at submission to ensure that they are aware of the submission.

  • • Author names will be published exactly as they appear in the accepted manuscript.
  • • Indicate affiliations by number only.
  • • Affiliation footnotes should appear in numerical order at first mention. Please use the symbols provided in this document for other designations
  • • Numbers and symbols should be in superscript.
  • • Do not include titles (Dr., PhD, Professor, etc.).
Affiliations:
  • • Affiliations will be published as they appear in the accepted manuscript.
  • • Include each component in order of small to large (Department, Division, Section, Institution, City, State, Country).
  • • Do not include ZIP or Postal Codes, street addresses, or building/office numbers.
  • • Do not use abbreviations (e.g. Dept.).
  • • Do not list positions within an institution (e.g. Department Chair, Professor, etc.).
  • • List each affiliation individually and in full.


 

Symbol Name Definition
Pilcrow (paragraph symbol) 1st set of equal contributors
& Ampersand 2nd set of equal contributors
* Asterisk sadasd
#a Pound/number sign First Current address
#b Pound/number sign Second Current address
Dagger/Cross Deceased
^ Caret Consortium/Group Authorship

 

Authors:

John Doe1¶, Antonie Data1¶ , Johannes van Stats1,#a, Marie Testperson2* , David Ribosome Jr.3,5, Gregory H.T. McBio4,#b , Angela Reviewerson1,2&, Marina Measure1&, on behalf of The Bunny Genome Sequencing Consortium^

Affiliations:
  • • Department, Institution, City, State, Country
  • • Department of Dermatology, Division of Rabbit Health, Section of Veterinary Medicine, St. Hare Hospital, San Francisco, California, United States of America
  • • Department of Libraries and Archives, National Contemporary Bunny Museum, Lagomorph, Connecticut, United States of America .
  • • Department of Restoration, National Contemporary Bunny Museum, Lagomorph, Connecticut, United States of America
  • • Department of Archaeology, Bunny University, Lagomorph, Connecticut, United States of America 
    a). Current Address: Department of Carrot Science, Bunny University, Lagomorph, Connecticut, United States of America
    b).Current Address: Department of Canine Evasion, Bunny University, Lagomorph, Connecticut, United States of America
Corresponding author :
  • • E-mail: testperson@university.ed (MT)
  • • These authors contributed equally to this work.
  • • These authors also contributed equally to this work.
  • • Membership of the Bunny Genome Sequencing Consortium is provided in the Acknowledgments
Cover letter

Upload a cover letter as a separate file in the online system. The length limit is 1 page.

The cover letter should include the following information:

  • • Summarize the study’s contribution to the scientific literature
  • • Relate the study to previously published work
  • • Specify the type of article (for example, research article, systematic review, meta-analysis, clinical trial)
  • • Describe any prior interactions with Publisher regarding the submitted manuscript
  • • Suggest appropriate Academic Editors to handle your manuscript
  • • List any opposed reviewers
Title page

The title, authors, and affiliations should all be included on a title page as the first page of the manuscript file.

Abstract

The Abstract comes after the title page in the manuscript file. The abstract text is also entered in a separate field in the submission system.

The Abstract should:
  • • Describe the main objective(s) of the study
  • • Explain how the study was done, including any model organisms used, without methodological detail
  • • Summarize the most important results and their significance
  • • Not exceed 300 words
Abstracts should not include:
  • • Citations
  • • Abbreviations, if possible

Introduction

The introduction should:
  • • Provide background that puts the manuscript into context and allows readers outside the field to understand the purpose and significance of the study
  • • Define the problem addressed and why it is important
  • • Include a brief review of the key literature
  • • Note any relevant controversies or disagreements in the field
  • • Conclude with a brief statement of the overall aim of the work and a comment about whether that aim was achieved
Materials and Methods

The Materials and Methods section should provide enough detail to allow suitably skilled investigators to fully replicate your study. Specific information and/or protocols for new methods should be included in detail. If materials, methods, and protocols are well established, authors may cite articles where those protocols are described in detail, but the submission should include sufficient information to be understood independent of these references

Results

The Results section should provide details of all of the experiments that are required to support the conclusions of the paper, including information on the number of replicates (if relevant to ensure replicability). There is no specific word limit for this section, but details of experiments that are peripheral to the main thrust of the article and that detract from the focus of the article should not be included. The section may be divided into subsections, each with a concise subheading. Large datasets, including raw data, should be submitted as supplemental files; these are published online alongside the accepted article. The Results section should be written in past tense.

Acknowledgments

Those who contributed to the work but do not meet our authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments with a description of the contribution. 
Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named.

Results, Discussion, Conclusions

These sections may all be separate, or may be combined to create a mixed Results/Discussion section (commonly labeled “Results and Discussion”) or a mixed Discussion/Conclusions section (commonly labeled “Discussion”). These sections may be further divided into subsections, each with a concise subheading, as appropriate. These sections have no word limit, but the language should be clear and concise. 
Together, these sections should describe the results of the experiments, the interpretation of these results, and the conclusions that can be drawn. 
Authors should explain how the results relate to the hypothesis presented as the basis of the study and provide a succinct explanation of the implications of the findings, particularly in relation to previous related studies and potential future directions for research.

References

Any and all available works can be cited in the reference list. Acceptable sources include:

  • • Published or accepted manuscripts
  • • Manuscripts on pre-print servers, if the manuscript is submitted to a journal and also publicly available as a pre-print

Do not cite the following sources in the reference list:

  • • Unavailable and unpublished work, including manuscripts that have been submitted but not yet accepted (e.g., “unpublished work,” “data not shown”). Instead, include those data as supplementary material or deposit the data in a publicly available database.
  • • Personal communications (these should be supported by a letter from the relevant authors but not included in the reference list)

References are listed at the end of the manuscript and numbered in the order that they appear in the text. In the text, cite the reference number in brackets. Publisher uses the numbered citation (citation-sequence) method and first six authors, et al. 
Do not include citations in abstracts or author summaries. 
Make sure the parts of the manuscript are in the correct order before ordering the citations.

Supporting Information

Authors can submit essential supporting files and multimedia files along with their manuscripts. All Supporting Information will be subject to peer review. All file types can be submitted, but files must be smaller than 10 MB in size. 
Authors may use almost any description as the item name for a Supporting Information file as long as it contains an “S” and number. For example, “S1 Appendix” and “S2 Appendix,” “S1 Table” and “S2 Table,” and so forth. 
Supporting files should be publication-ready, as they are not copyedited. Supporting Information captions List Supporting Information captions at the end of the manuscript file. Do not submit captions in a separate file.
The file number and name are required in a caption, and we highly recommend including a one-line title as well. You may also include a legend in your caption, but it is not required.

INSTRUCTIONS TO REVIEWERS

Deciding Whether to Review a Manuscript Conflict of Interest. Reviewers should not accept to review a manuscript if a conflict of interest exists per the AHA Conflict of Interest Policy

If you have questions regarding a potential conflict of interest, please contact the handling editor, and he/she will decide whether it is appropriate to review the manuscript. Time. Please consider whether you can complete the review within 10 days. Also, after agreeing to complete a review, if unforeseen circumstances prevent the reviewer from completing within the allotted time, please contact the editor immediately.

  • Examples of typical conflicts of interest are:
  • 1. The reviewer has an ownership interest in a company that stands to benefit from the results reported in the manuscript.
  • 2. The reviewer is currently collaborating with the author or has recently collaborated with the author (i.e. within the past 5 years).
  • 3. The reviewer feels he or she cannot give an impartial and objective review, free from professional or personal bias.

Peer Review Process

If you realize that a conflict of interest exists after the review process begins, please notify the handling editor immediately.

Ethical Responsibilities during the Review Process

  • 1. Confidentiality - The reviewer should maintain confidentiality about the existence and substance of the manuscript. It is inappropriate to share the manuscript or to discuss it in detail with others before publication. There are some exceptions, if approved by the editor. One example is that the reviewer may ask a colleague to collaborate on a review. However, your collaborator on the review should also agree to maintain confidentiality, and the editor should be informed of the participation of this additional person.
  • 2. Reviewer Conduct - . As stated in the Uniform Requirements (http://www.icmje.org/#peer), “Reviewers must not publicly discuss authors’ work and must not appropriate authors’ ideas before the manuscript is published. Reviewers must not retain the manuscript for their personal use and should destroy copies of manuscripts after submitting their reviews.” Knowledge of the content of confidential manuscripts should not be used for any other purpose unrelated to the reviewing of the manuscript.
  • 3. Reporting Concerns - The reviewer also has the responsibility of noting any ethical concerns, not limited to but including suspected duplicate publication, fraud, plagiarism, or ethical concerns about the use of animals or humans in the research being reported.

Constructing a Review

  • 1. Rating a manuscript - In this section of the review form, the reviewer ranks the
  • • Novelty/Originality,
  • • Scientific Importance/Impact,
  • • Adequacy of Methods/Experimental Design,
  • • Quality of Data/Presentation Results, and
  • • Overall Scientific Priority of the manuscript based on the following scale:
  • • Top 10 % = High Priority
  • • Top 20% = Somewhat High Priority
  • • Top 30% = Average Priority
  • • Upper 50% = Somewhat Low Priority
  • • Lower 50% = Low Priority
  • • N/A = Does not apply to this paper

Manuscripts rated in the upper 20% are more likely to be accepted for publication. The reviewer also makes a recommendation for publication. 
Indicate whether you have any concerns regarding the statistical analysis used or if there are any ethical considerations.

  • 2. In confidential comments to the Editor - Summarize your reasons for your rating and recommendations. Provide specific comments regarding the original aspects of the work and its importance.
  • 3. In comments to the Author - The comments to the author should not include any statements that indicate to the author your judgment as to the acceptability of the paper for publication. All comments should be stated in a constructive and helpful way. The reviewer should discuss the shortcomings and/or strengths of a study. Include in your critique your judgment of
  • • originality and scientific importance,
  • • adequacy and length of the title,
  • • adequacy of the abstract,
  • • introduction, rationale and clarity of hypothesis
  • • adequacy of experimental design and methods,
  • • quality of data and presentation of results, including figures,
  • • appropriateness of the authors’ interpretation of their data,
  • • length and appropriateness of the discussion, and
  • • inclusion of recent and appropriate references. If possible, make specific recommendations for revisions.

REVIEW PROCESS:

Articles, Letters, Brief Communications, Communications Arising, Technical Reports, Analysis, Reviews, Perspectives, Progress articles and Insight articles.

Screening Protocol:

A team of experts will conduct the first review process of the submitted manuscripts to ensure high quality standards.

Expert Review

Every paper submitted to an IASTED conference is sent to at least three reviewers that include members of the International Program Committee (IPC), members of the Technical Committee, and additional qualified reviewers.

Double-Blind review

Each paper is double-blind reviewed by at least two reviewers, and ideally is double-blind reviewed by three or more reviewers. After the paper has been reviewed, the Journal Editor in chief examines the paper and the reviewers’ comments. Then the chief makes the final decision on each paper. We encourage our reviewers to give a detailed account of their decision. 
Once reviewed, every author will be able to view the reviewers’ comments as a single document. The author will learn the paper’s average scores on originality, contribution to the scientific community, use of references, presentation of ideas, language level, as well as any other comments that the reviewers have provided.

Paper Approval

Acceptance is primarily based on the relevance, originality, technical soundness, presentation, references, and scientific merit of the paper. All papers must be well written. Some papers may be rejected based on the level of language. If the paper is not clear, it cannot be reviewed. The conference chair makes the final decision on the acceptance or rejection of the paper.

PEER REVIEW PROCESS:

The peer review process at the Journal includes the following steps:

  • 1. Authors submit an article
  • 2. The editor-in-chief verifies relevance of the article to the journal's policy for publishing such papers
  • 3.He chooses peer-reviewers, who are authorities in the selected fields (usually three and a biostatistician).
  • 4.To help decide on the merits of the paper and reach a common conclusion on the paper's suitability for publication, the editor-in-chief usually asks for an editorial board gathering to study the peer-reviewer's comments.
  • 5.The authors may be asked to respond to the questions raised by reviewers if the paper is accepted for publication or a rejection letter is sent if not accepted.
  • 6.The author/s are to respond in due time and clarify ambiguities if any.
  • 7.Upon receiving the resubmitted paper, the reviewers (usually two out of three and the biostatistician) check for the author/s feedbacks on their comments.
  • 8. Upon the last round of review (mentioned at 8), and their approval, the paper is revised by editors and it is put in the queue for publication.

PUBLISHING BENEFITS:

Benefits of publishing with STAUNCH GLOBAL:

  • • Standard review process within 21 days
  • • Publication immediately after acceptance
  • • Quick and quality editorial, review processing
  • • Abstracts and full texts for the accepted manuscripts published in HTML, XML and PDF formats by Staunch
  • Global and are freely accessible to everyone immediately after publication.
  • • All works published by Staunch Globalare under the terms of Open Access Creative Commons Attribution License. This permits anyone to copy, distribute, transmit and adapt the work, provided if it is the original work and source is appropriately cited.
  • • Staunch Globalsupports the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing.
  • • Staunch GlobalJournals strictly follow to standard review process.
  • • All the articles are subjected to standard peer-reviewing prior to publication.
  • • Staunch Globalwill keep up to date with latest advances in the respective fields and papers published in its journals will reach the readers directly through E-mail.
  • • Archived online transactions of Staunch Globalprovide the International scientific community with immediate and permanent access to individual papers.
  • • Staunch Globalaccepts online letters from the Editors and brief comments that contribute to the previously published articles or other relevant findings.

 

ARCHIVE:

currently data not available for this tab

 

 

ARTICLES IN PRESS:

coming soon

 

ARTICLE PROCESSING CHARGES

In open access model our publication services eliminates subscriptions and pay-per-view fees, hence enabling readers to access research at no cost.To sustainable the business publisher applies an Article Processing Charge to cover the costs of the editorial workflow and production.

These include:
  • • Publishing process management
  • • Online publishing technology
  • • Typesetting
  • • Proof reading and copyediting
  • • Promotion and dissemination of your work
  • • Indexing and listing across all major repositories
  • • Long-term archiving

Staunch Global publishes all its journals in full open access model. The scientific community and the general public have, for free, unlimited and immediate access to all content published in our journals as soon as it is published on the Internet. 
Staunch Global is committed to keeping its open access publication charges at a minimum level and follows central mechanism for funding Open Access (OA) scholarly publishing. Staunch Global will accepts waiver requests from individuals and will be considered case-by-case basis and may be granted in cases of lack of funds. Scientific committee is responsible for the requests coming from the individuals, committee usually waive charges for authors from low-income countries.
APC covers editorial services and production of articles like Peer-reviewing, editing, publishing, maintaining and archiving, and allows immediate access to the full text versions of the research articles. Publication in the first few issues of a new journal is usually free of charge.
The APC covers the publishing costs, including editorial checks and improvements to the article before publication, data hosting (where applicable), typesetting and other aspects of production, as well as technical development and maintenance of the publishing platform. Payment will be processed after accepting the article for publication and the person who submits the manuscript is responsible for the publication fee payment.
We also provide administrative support during peer review, which is led by the authors, who are solely responsible for suggesting suitable referees in a timely manner. As with any publisher, we cannot guarantee that peer review is completed in a specific time frame.

EDITOR ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES:

  • • Providing guidelines to authors for preparing and submitting manuscripts
  • • Providing a clear statement of the Journal’s policies on authorship criteria
  • • Treating all authors with fairness, courtesy, objectivity, honesty, and transparency
  • • Establishing and defining policies on conflicts of interest for all involved in the publication process, including editors, staff (e.g., editorial and sales), authors, and reviewers
  • • Protecting the confidentiality of every author’s work
  • • Establishing a system for effective and rapid peer review
  • • Making editorial decisions with reasonable speed and communicating them in a clear and constructive manner
  • • Being vigilant in avoiding the possibility of editors and/or referees delaying a manuscript for suspect reasons
  • • Establishing clear guidelines for authors regarding acceptable practices for sharing experimental materials and information, particularly those required to replicate the research, before and after publication
  • • Establishing a procedure for reconsidering editorial decisions
  • • Describing, implementing, and regularly reviewing policies for handling ethical issues and allegations or findings of misconduct by authors and anyone involved in the peer review process
  • • Informing authors of solicited manuscripts that the submission will be evaluated according to the journal’s standard procedures or outlining the decision-making process if it differs from those procedures
  • • Developing mechanisms, in cooperation with the publisher, to ensure timely publication of accepted manuscripts

SPECIAL ISSUE:

Staunch Globalpublishes the special issues to draw attention to under-researched or controversial topics or to new emerging themes in international business. The special issues are invited from recognized experts with in the journal scope and to attract articles of the highest quality 
The main objective of the special issues is to integrate and analyze current thinking and debates in a focused area of applied research in order to inform the decision-making and policy-making community. 
Staunch Global accepts the proposal for special issues on topics that fall within the scope of the journal. Proposals for Special Issues should be submitted by the Lead Guest Editor of the Special Issue
A call for papers must be submitted together with the proposal.The proposal for the special issue must contain the following information:

  • • Guest editors: a short biography of the guest editors with a focus on the expertise of the proposed topic and the involvement in relevant communities
  • • Deadlines: appropriate schedule stating the major dates including paper submission, acceptance notice, etc.
  • • Topics: the most important topics related the proposed special issue must be listed
  • • List of reviewers: a list of the reviewers of the special issue (their names, links to their their homepages and areas of expertise). It is mandatory that all related topics of the issue are covered by the group of reviewers
  • • Distribution and promotion: a plan for the distribution and promotion of the issue and to attract quality submissions

All proposals are subject to approval by the journal following a discussion of the proposed Special Issue among the journal’s Editorial Board. If approved, a Call-for-Papers for the Special Issue will be issued and posted online. 
Special Issues are made freely available online to all interested readers leading to the maximum possible dissemination and recognition within the scientific community.

Responsibilities of Guest Editors
Special Issue Guidelines
  • • The Guest Editor(s) are responsible for the selection, commissioning, editing and provision of the final manuscripts to the Editors
  • • will normally be expected to provide a preface/ introduction to the issue
  • • The Journal Editors will communicate directly with authors only in exceptional circumstances and at relevant points of the production process.
  • • Guest Editors will be expected to update the Journal Editors regularly on the progress of the Special Issue and ensure that authors follow the Journal's presentation and referencing guidelines
  • • Editor will be expected to ensure that all authors supply illustrations of an appropriate quality and that authors obtain all necessary copyright permissions. Relevant documentation should be provided with the final version of the Special Issue
  • • will be expected to proof-read the entire volume and to ensure that authors proof-read their contributions
  • • should provide full contact details, including email addresses, for all contributors
  • 1. Staunch Globalencourages the submission of proposals for special issues that will be path breaking and exciting for our international readership.
  • 2. The normal size of special issues is a minimum of 5, maximum of 10 manuscripts (5-7,000 words each, including references).
  • 3. We strongly encourage a diversity of authorship—especially in terms of country of authors (i.e. not all authors should be from the same country or region).
  • 4. Conveners of special issues should formally submit a written proposal to any one of the editors that includes a summary of the topic, an argument about its intellectual merits and relation to current debates in social & cultural geography, a complete list of authors (full contact details), titles, abstracts, and a realistic timeline.
  • 5. The editors will discuss the proposal as a collective. If approved, a single editor will handle all the manuscripts in the special issue (including the convener’s introduction).
  • 6. Conveners should have their authors submit their individual anonymized manuscripts at roughly the same time (within a few days). Authors (not conveners) should submit to Manuscript Central. In their cover letter, authors should signal that the paper is part of a (named) special issue.
  • 7. All papers will be refereed in exactly the same way standard Staunch Globalmanuscripts are refereed (typically 3 anonymous reviews from around the globe). One editor will handle all the manuscripts. That editor will not be bound to use referees suggested by conveners.
  • 8. Submitting a manuscript to a special issue does not guarantee acceptance. Papers succeed or fail on their own merits. The Editor’s decision is final.
  • 9. If an accepted paper has been waiting in the batch-assignment pile for over 9 months, we may need to dissolve the special issue and publish accepted articles as standalone pieces. This is so that successful, timely authors are not penalized by tardy or unsuccessful papers.
  • 10. Once all of the manuscripts have been accepted, the convener will submit an editorial introduction to the issue. It should not exceed 4,000 words (including references). This introduction normally will not be refereed, but it will be edited by the editor. This must happen quickly to keep things on schedule.

PUBLISHING POLICIES

1. OPEN ACCESS POLICY:

The Open Access Publication: 
We are working in compliance with the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing

  • 1. The author(s) and copyright holder(s) grant(s) to all users a free, irrevocable, worldwide, perpetual right of access to, and a license to copy, use, distribute, transmit and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship, as well as the right to make small numbers of printed copies for their personal use.
  • 2. A complete version of the work and all supplemental materials, including a copy of the permission as stated above, in a suitable standard electronic format is deposited immediately upon initial publication in at least one online repository that is supported by an academic institution, scholarly society, government agency, or other well-established organization that seeks to enable open access, unrestricted distribution, interoperability, and long-term archiving (for the biomedical sciences, PubMed Central is such a repository).
  • 3. Open access is a property of individual works, not necessarily journals or publishers.
  • 4. Community standards, rather than copyright law, will continue to provide the mechanism for enforcement of proper attribution and responsible use of the published work, as they do now.

2. PRIVACY POLICY:

  • 1. Purpose of collecting and using data Collecting your data serves to provide you with user-friendly, efficient and secure internet services. We use the collected and processed personal data in order to provide those users who are interested with information. Furthermore, we generally process the data with the goal of improving our service and ensuring its security. No personal data is processed: we process the data anonymously or using pseudonyms. Whenever you complete transactions using our website, e.g. opening a user account and / or purchasing a publication, further data processing processes may take place, of which you will of course be separately informed.
  • 2. The form and scope of collecting and processing personal data
    a) Inventory data 
    If you wish to receive a newsletter we need to save and use your e-mail address. We will then send electronic messages at appropriate intervals to the e-mail address you gave us, which may also contain topic-specific advertisements along with editorial information on our products and services. However, you can unsubscribe at any time.
    b) Usage data 
    As a general rule, you may access our websites without having to provide any personal data. Nevertheless, we will create a so-called utilization profile by using a pseudonym if you visit our websites as a registered or unregistered user. This implies that data will be collected and saved anonymously for marketing and optimization purposes. This data includes information on the website from which you were taken to our offer, information on your internet service provider and the offers you viewed on our website, as well as the date and length of your visit. On the basis of this already pseudonymous data a utilization profile will be created, along with a corresponding pseudonym. For this purpose, cookies may be used (see subparagraph 5 below). Authentication and tracking logs will be used to compile user statistics. This data will not contain any personally identifiable information.
  • 3. Passing on data to third parties We only pass on personal data to a third party to the extent necessary to fulfill our contractual relationship (if at all), if we are bound by law or if it should be necessary in order to implement our general terms and conditions of business or any other agreements concluded with you, or in order to enforce our rights and claims. Provided your personal data is passed on for other purposes we will ask for your approval in each individual case. If you do not approve we will of course not pass on the data.
  • 4. Disclosure, rectification, deletion, account freezing Provided you send us a request in writing, we will inform you about which personal data we have saved at any time. You may at any time demand that we freeze or delete your user account data and accordingly your personal data. Only data we need in order to process open tasks or to enforce our rights are exempt from deletion, as well as data we are required to save by law.
  • 5. Security We employ technical and organizational security measures to guarantee that your data is protected from loss, incorrect modifications and unauthorized third-party access. To the greatest extent possible, we ensure that only authorized persons have access to your personal data and only insofar as it is necessary in the scope of the above-mentioned purposes.

3. PLAGIARISM AND COPYRIGHT

Journal editors and readers have a right to expect that submitted work is the author's own, that it has not been plagiarized (i.e. taken from other authors without permission, if permission is required) and that copyright has not been breached (for example, if figures or tables are reproduced). Protecting intellectual property Journal owners and authors have a right to protect their intellectual property.

Copying includes using the figures, charts, diagrams, equations, computer code, graphs, photographs, text, abstract, or subject headings of a previous work without proper reference.Copying also includes cutting and pasting substantial portions of text from another work without proper reference.

Why is plagiarism wrong? 
Plagiarism is wrong because it is the theft of the work of another author. The work of another author is the intellectual property of that author. By failing to make a proper reference to that author's work, the plagiarist is stealing that property. For more information on plagiarism, please visit http://www.bbk.ac.uk/polsoc/students/international/referencing

Why is self-plagiarism wrong? 
Self-plagiarism is wrong because when you are copying some of your previous work in a new publication without proper referencing, you are asking for the same credit twice. Thus, self-plagiarism is dishonest and goes against academic integrity.

What happens to authors found to have plagiarized work? 
STJ will not publish plagiarized work, and further work from that author will not be read and/or reviewed for two years.

 

  • • Different systems are available to protect intellectual property and journals must choose whichever best suits their purpose and ethos. Some journals require authors to relinquish their copyright, other journals license content from authors, whereas others adopt an open-access model under creative commons licenses. Publisher recommends adoption of a system that licenses content from authors, rather than more traditional systems that require copyright assignment/transfer by authors. Peer reviewer conduct and intellectual property Authors are entitled to expect that peer reviewers or other individuals privy to the work an author submits to a journal will not steal their research ideas or plagiarize their work.
  • • Journal guidelines to peer reviewers should be explicit about the roles and responsibilities of peer reviewers, in particular the need to treat submitted material in confidence until it has been published.
  • • Journals should ask peer reviewers to destroy submitted manuscripts after they have reviewed them.
  • • Editors should expect allegations of theft or plagiarism to be substantiated, and should treat allegations of theft or plagiarism seriously.
  • • Editors should protect peer reviewers from authors and, even if peer reviewer identities are revealed, should discourage authors from contacting peer reviewers directly, especially if misconduct is suspected. Plagiarism is claiming that someone else's writing, experiments, and/or research are your own. This is done by copying another person’s work including articles and/or experiments that are not common knowledge without a reference to that work.
  • • When STJ believes that the author made a good faith error in interpreting the Guidelines, STJ may request that the author change the paper to conform to the Guidelines. STJ reserves the right to change the Guidelines at any time and without notice. Authors are subject to the Guidelines in effect at the date of submission of their work to STJ. Please feel free to contact STJ if you have further questions.
  • Common Knowledge

    Common knowledge is a fact that is widely known and available in many sources. An author does not need to cite common knowledge. The following are some guidelines to what knowledge is common which can also be found in encyclopedias, dictionaries, or other common sources.

    For example, the following is rarely common knowledge:

  • • "The Gluglac Basin Council paid for the study examining the effects of transferring 950 m3/day of water to new urban developments."
  • A fact that is widely known and available in many sources in a specific field need not be cited. If first-year undergraduate students would know this fact, it is probably common knowledge in the specific field.

     

    For example:

  • • "The increase in the internal energy of a system is equal to the amount of energy added by heating the system minus the amount lost as a result of the work done by the system on its surroundings."