Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science (J MATH COMPUT SCI-JM) is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), published by International Scientific Research Publications (ISRP).
At International Scientific Research Publications (ISRP), the integrity of our academic content and publishing process is paramount. This document outlines the best practice principles that we apply to our books and journals. We hope these guidelines will be useful to many different groups, including authors, peer reviewers, editors within and outside of International Scientific Research Publications (ISRP), societies, publishing partners and funders.
Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science (J MATH COMPUT SCI-JM) is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE); a global not-for-profit organization which aims to support publishers and editors to achieve high standards in publishing ethics. We follow standards and best practice guidelines set by other relevant industry associations. Any external guidelines we follow are referred to in the relevant sections below.
We uphold high standards papers, and expect research published by International Scientific Research Publications (ISRP) cover:
In addition to the general principles above, we expect our journal editorial teams to provide specific guidelines and policies for authors on research integrity and ethics appropriate to their subject matter and discipline.
Anyone who believes that research published by International Scientific Research Publications (ISRP) has not been carried out in line with these Academic Research Publishing Ethics Guidelines, or the above principles, should raise their concern with the relevant editor or email
email@example.com. Concerns will be addressed by following COPE guidelines where possible and/or by escalating the matter to our Publishing Ethics Committee if necessary.
We are committed to editorial independence, and strive in all cases to prevent this principle from being compromised through competing interests, fear, or any other corporate, business, financial or political influence. Our editorial processes reflect this commitment to editorial independence.
We do not discriminate against authors, editors or peer reviewers based on personal characteristics or identity. We are committed to embedding diversity, removing barriers to inclusion, and promoting equity at every stage of our publishing process. We actively
seek and encourage submissions from scholars of diverse backgrounds, including race and ethnicity, gender identity, sexual orientation, nationality, religion, and disability. Editorial decisions on manuscripts submitted to our journals are made by external academic editors and based on independent peer review reports.
We do not tolerate abusive behavior or correspondence towards our staff and others involved in the publishing process on our behalf. If anyone involved in this process engages in such behavior, we have the right to take action to protect others from this abuse. This may include, for example, withdrawal of a manuscript from consideration, or challenging clearly abusive peer review comments.
Peer review is critical to maintaining the standards of our publications. We:
allow co-reviewing, an invited reviewer can work with a more junior colleague to review a manuscript for the purpose of reviewer training. This allows the co-reviewer to gain experience with the review process and become a viable reviewer for a journal.
An invited reviewer can have a co-reviewer on a manuscript as long as the journal’s editorial office is made aware of this and approves the co-review. The invited reviewer will need to reach out to the journal’s editorial office about the co-reviewer when they accept the review. The co-reviewer must also declare any relevant competing interests.
The co-reviewer must be specifically identified during the completion of the review, either in the ‘Confidential Comments to the Editor’ section or, if a journal has a specific question about co-review, in the reviewer report form. This allows the co-reviewer to be credited for the review and to be added to a journal’s reviewer pool.
We acknowledge that different disciplines and publication formats have different norms for who is listed as an author. Where no other guidance is specified, we recommend applying the following principles.
The corresponding author’s specific responsibilities include:
We encourage authors to list anyone who does not meet the criteria for authorship in an Acknowledgments section in their publication with permission, for example to recognize the contributions of anyone who provided research or writing assistance.
COPE also provides extensive resources on authorship and authorship disputes, and we encourage anyone involved in editorial decisions to familiarize themselves with these resources. We support our editors in dealing with any authorship disputes, including escalating or seeking advice on cases with COPE. We integrate with established and emerging industry standards to increase transparency in authorship (for example, ORCID). We support initiatives that enable transparency in authorship and contributor ship such as CRediT taxonomy.
Any article affiliations should represent the institution(s) at which the research presented was conducted and/or supported and/or approved. For non-research content, any affiliations should represent the institution(s) with which each author is currently affiliated.
Plagiarism is defined as ‘using someone else’s ideas, words, data, or other material produced by them without acknowledgement’.
Plagiarism can occur in respect to all types of sources and media, including:
• text, illustrations, musical quotations, extended mathematical derivations, computer code, etc.;
• material downloaded from websites or drawn from manuscripts or other media;
• published and unpublished material, including lectures, presentations and grey literature.
We do not tolerate plagiarism in any of our publications, and we reserve the right to check all submissions through appropriate plagiarism checking tools. Submissions containing suspected plagiarism, in whole or part, will be rejected. If plagiarism is discovered post publication, we will follow our guidance outlined in the Retractions, Corrections and Expressions of Concern section of these guidelines. We expect our readers, reviewers and editors to raise any suspicions of plagiarism, either by contacting the relevant editor or by emailing firstname.lastname@example.org
Duplicate and Redundant Publication
Duplicate or redundant publication, or ‘self-plagiarism’, occurs when a work, or substantial parts of a work, is published more than once by the author(s) of the work without appropriate cross-referencing or justification for the overlap. This can be in the same or a different language (Based on COPE’s definition of redundant publication, available at: https://publicationethics.org/category/keywords/redundant-publication).
We do not support substantial overlap between publications, unless:
We expect our readers, reviewers and editors to raise any suspicions of duplicate or redundant publication, either by contacting the relevant editor or by
When authors submit manuscripts to our journals, these manuscripts should not be under consideration, accepted for publication or in press within a different journal, book or similar entity, unless a journal is explicit that it does not have an exclusive submission policy. However, deposition of a preprint on the author’s personal website, in an institutional repository, or in a preprint archive shall not be viewed as prior or duplicate publication.
Any manuscript based on a thesis should be a reworking of the material in the thesis and written to conform to the journal’s style guide. When quoting from the thesis or reusing figures, authors should avoid self-plagiarism by citing and referencing any extracts copied or adapted from the thesis appropriately. If a thesis was published by a publisher and is publicly accessible, permission may be required from the thesis publisher before submitting to a journal. The relevant editor should be informed that the manuscript draws on a thesis in the cover letter.
We try to ensure that any International Scientific Research Publications (ISRP) publication is free from undue influence. Authors submitting journal manuscript to International Scientific Research Publications (ISRP), employees, editors and reviewers of International Scientific Research Publications (ISRP), are required to declare any potential competing interests that could interfere with the objectivity or integrity of a publication. Competing interests are situations that could be perceived to exert an undue influence on the presentation, review or publication of a piece of work. These may be financial, non-financial, professional, contractual or personal in nature. We also expect that anyone who suspects an undisclosed competing interest regarding a work published or under consideration by International Scientific Research Publications (ISRP) should inform the relevant editor or email email@example.com.
Many of our publications require the inclusion of a funding declaration in addition to a competing interest declaration. Please check with the relevant journal or book editor regarding declaration requirements.
Freedom of expression is critical to us as academic publishers, but we do not support publishing false statements that harm the reputation of individuals, groups, or organizations. Our legal team can advise on pre-publication libel reviews, and will also address allegations of libel in any of our publications.
Journal editors will consider retractions, corrections or expressions of concern in line with COPE’s Retraction Guidelines. If an author is found to have made an error, the journal will issue a corrigendum. If the journal is found to have made an error, they will issue an
erratum. Retractions are usually reserved for articles that are so seriously flawed that their findings or conclusions should not be relied upon, or that contain substantial plagiarism or life-endangering content. Journals that publish Accepted Manuscripts may make minor changes such as those which would likely occur during copyediting, typesetting
or proofreading, but any substantive corrections will be carried out in line with COPE’s Retraction Guidelines.
In exceptional cases, we may remove an article from online publication where we believe it is necessary to comply with our legal obligations. This includes, without limitation, where we have concerns that the article is defamatory, violates personal privacy or confidentiality laws, is the subject of a court order, or might pose a serious health risk to the general public. In these circumstances, we may decide to remove the article and publish a notice that clearly states why the full article has been removed.
In the case of books, if someone raises a legal, ethical or security concern about a published manuscript by International Scientific Research Publications (ISRP), we would inform the author(s) and editor(s) involved. Our next step would be to investigate the concern and, if appropriate, address it through dialogue or negotiation with any third parties involved or by referring it to a relevant institution for investigation. If the concern relates to the integrity or accuracy of the content itself, we would consider issuing a correction, or a retraction and withdrawal from sale. Where any content is retracted, we would do so in a way that still preserves the integrity of the academic record and of other affiliated works (for example, other volumes in a series). This includes maintaining any associated metadata and, if legally possible, the abstract.
We also participate in Crossmark; a multi-publisher initiative to provide a standard way for readers to locate the current version of a piece of content, view any changes that have occurred, and access additional information about that publication record.
Where research data are collected or presented as images, modifying these images can sometimes misrepresent the results obtained or their significance. We recognize that there can be legitimate reasons for modifying images, but we expect authors to avoid modifying images where this leads to the falsification, fabrication, or misrepresentation of their results.
Where we are made aware of fraudulent research or research misconduct by an International Scientific Research Publications (ISRP) author, our first concern is the integrity of content we have published. We work with the relevant editor(s), COPE, and other appropriate institutions or organizations, to investigate. Any publication found to include fraudulent results will be retracted, or an appropriate correction or expression of concern will be issued. Please see the https://publicationethics.org/retraction-guidelines for more information.
We strive to follow COPE’s Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing and encourage our publishing partners to uphold these same principles.
We support transparency and openness around data, code, and other materials associated with research. We expect authors to maintain accurate records of supporting evidence necessary to allow others to understand, verify, and replicate new findings, and to supply or provide access to this supporting evidence, on reasonable request. Where appropriate and where allowed by their employer, funding body or others who might have an interest, we encourage authors to:
Many of our publications also permit authors to submit and publish supplementary materials that are not essential for inclusion or that cannot be accommodated in the main text, but that would be of benefit to the reader. Unless otherwise stated, it should be assumed that data, code, and other materials or supplementary files will not be peer-reviewed.
International Scientific Research Publications (ISRP) aims to provide authors with the ability to connect supporting evidence with their manuscripts, either on our own platform or through third party services. International Scientific Research Publications (ISRP) is also a signatory of Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines. Please contact firstname.lastname@example.org for information on its transparency requirements.
We maintain a record of the existence of everything we publish with information (metadata) describing each publication. If our content is deemed not to comply with the laws of a sovereign nation, we make every effort to ensure the metadata remain
accessible within that jurisdiction. Where we are obliged to alter the publication record in any way, such as in the case of research misconduct leading to retraction of a publication, we preserve the academic record as far possible. See the Retractions, Corrections and Expressions of Concern of these guidelines for information about how we do this.
We apply these same principles to our marketing, and do not modify or manipulate the representation of the academic record in our marketing activities.
We participate in many global access initiatives to ensure that academics from low-income countries are able to publish in our Open Access journals. We also review and consider requests for waivers from academics who have insufficient funds to pay an Article Processing Charge in our Open Access journals.
As a member of COPE we support COPE’s Statement on Censorship.
Social media and email communication are powerful tools for disseminating and engaging with our publications, for reaching new readers and for keeping content alive. However, such onward communication should never be at the expense of the integrity of the content or of the academic record. All colleagues with responsibility for our social media channels are expected to familiarize themselves with relevant International Scientific Research Publications (ISRP) social media policies and best practice in media use. Colleagues are also expected to apply these policies and this guidance when using external influencers during a social media campaign.
We allow for limited, appropriate and sometimes targeted advertising on our online academic content platform. Where present, advertising must: