Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

 

Discrete Mathematics Letters (DML) follows the

It is expected that the authors, reviewers, and editors of DML follow the best-practice guidelines on ethical behavior contained in the above-mentioned documents. Following is a selection of some key points concerning the aforementioned guidelines.

1. For Authors

1.1. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, execution, or interpretation of the research study. All those who have made significant contributions should be offered the opportunity to be listed as authors. Other individuals who have contributed to the study should be acknowledged, but not identified as authors.

1.2. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors (and no inappropriate co-authors) are included in the authors’ list of the manuscript and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.

1.3. Simultaneous submission of a manuscript to more than one journal is actually an unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. An author should not publish manuscripts containing essentially the same/similar results in more than one journal. Submission of a manuscript to DML implies that the same/similar manuscript has not been published elsewhere, is not currently submitted for publication elsewhere, and, if accepted by this journal, will not be published elsewhere.

1.4. Authors of the manuscripts submitted to DML are required to ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the works of others that this has been properly cited or quoted. Authors must cite publications that have influenced the nature of the work reported.

1.5. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are considered unethical and are unacceptable. The authors should not submit a manuscript to DML if it is plagiarized or fraudulent/fabricated. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published paper, it is the author’s duty to promptly notify the journal’s editor/publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

1.6. Every author is required to disclose in the submitted manuscript any financial or any other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should also be disclosed in the submitted manuscript.

1.7. The authors should cite only the relevant publications, and they should refrain from self-citation as much as possible.

2. For Editors

2.1. Editorial decisions on the manuscripts submitted to DML are made entirely based on their scientific content, importance, originality, clarity, language fluency, contribution to the scientific fields of interest to the journal’s audience (as defined in the journal’s scope); regardless of ethnic origin, citizenship, sexual orientation, race, gender, religious belief, or political orientation of the authors.

2.2. Editors and other editorial staff of DML are expected to keep the information obtained from the submitted manuscripts confidential and to keep the reviewers’ identities protected. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in any form of an editor’s own research without the written consent of the author(s).

2.3. Editorial office of DML is expected to release errata, clarifications or apology statements and expected to not refrain from retracting a publication if there is a clear evidence of scientific misconduct, unethical research, plagiarism or other violations of ethical scientific publishing.

2.4. Editors of DML are expected to refrain from suggesting that authors include citations to their (or their associates’) work merely to increase citation counts or to enhance the visibility of their or their associates’ work; suggestions must be based on valid academic reasons.

3. For Reviewers

3.1. Reviewers should accept to participate in the review process of a manuscript only if they have enough expertise in the topic of the manuscript to carry out a proper assessment.

3.2. Reviewers should not accept to participate in the review process of a manuscript if they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with the authors, corporations, or institutions related to the manuscript.

3.3. Reviewers are expected to keep the information obtained from the manuscripts, received for review, confidential. Unpublished materials disclosed in the manuscript must not be used in any form of a reviewer’s own research and must not be presented or discussed with others, without the written consent of the editor who handles the manuscript.

3.4. Reviews must be carried out constructively and objectively. The personal criticism of the author(s) is inappropriate. Reviewers should clearly articulate their points of view with supporting arguments.

3.5. Reviewers are expected to draw the handling editor’s attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published document of which they have personal knowledge.

3.6. Reviewers are expected to identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors. However, at the same time, they are also expected to refrain from suggesting that authors include citations to their (or their associates’) work merely to increase citation counts or to enhance the visibility of their or their associates’ work; suggestions must be based on valid academic reasons.