Conflicts of Interest

Policies on Conflicts of Interest for Authors: 

The examples of possible Conflict of Interest are as following: 

  1. One of the authors in the very institution or the organization who is reviewer or mentioned editor
  2. One of the authors, member of the thesis committee who has been reviewer or editor and vice versa
  3. One of the authors, editors or reviewers who are the coauthor in another article or, had been coauthor of an article in the past two years.

Authors should not introduce or name the people whom they know that they have studied the previous article and have put forward their hypothesis because this movement is in contrary with the hidden assessment process of the article automatically.

Manuscripts submitted by authors from our institution or from our reviewers' board should be reviewed by referees from outside. Papers submitted by reviewers and the Editorial Committee for review or revision and resubmission by the author if necessary.

Policies on Conflicts of Interest for Editors: 

Editors should avoid any action which increases conflicts of benefits with its unreasonable aspect.

The examples related to the relations which show conflicts of benefits of the editor or author are: 

  1. Both the author and editor have been employed by one institute
  2. Editor has been one member of thesis committee of author or vice versa
  3. The editor and the author are currently coworkers and coauthors in another article or have been coauthors in an article in past two years.

Policies on Conflict of Interest for Reviewers: 

Generally, reviewers should abstain from assessing the articles which they think they are involved in conflicts of benefits such as shared financial, organizational and personal benefits or any connections with other companies, institutes or related individuals with essay, the reviewers who may have conflicts of benefits in the field of a special article. This conflict should be clarified for the editor to determine the appropriate level of assessment. For instance, there is a situation where the reviewer is editing and evaluating a similar article in that journal or another along with a similar research paper, keep in mind that under the process of single-blind peer review, as reviewers may know the authors, it is likely that reviewers are aware of the involved conflicts of benefits among authors. Thus, they are limited through these conflicts. If reviewers become aware of such conflicts, they must inform the editor of the journal.