Asian-European Music Research E-Journal
CODE OF ETHICS
The editors and the editorial board of AEMR-EJ agree upon the following:
Publication ethics and malpractice statement for AEMR-EJ
1. Publication, authorship and author’s responsibilities
AEMR-EJ is a double blind peer reviewed journal. Papers have to be intended to report new scientific findings. They shall describe the findings understandably, give correct and complete references to previous work by the authors and by others (citations), repeat previously published findings only inasmuch as it is necessary for understanding the context, and in a clearly identified form.
Authors of scientific publications are always jointly responsible for their content. A so called "honorary authorship" is inadmissible.
With this definition of authorship, other contributions, including significant ones, such as
are not by themselves regarded sufficient to justify authorship. Additionally, institutions, organisations or private persons funding the author’s research have to be acknowledged.
Authors are obliged to participate in peer review process, to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes and to state that all data in article are real and authentic. In joint papers, authors have to state that they all significantly contributed to the research.
Authors have to list all references used in the paper. That includes written and audiovisual sources. Plagiarism or fraudulent data of any extent will lead to refusal and sanction from further publication. In the process of editing, detection software is applied. With respect to the originality of papers published, it is strictly forbidden to publish the same paper in more than one journal or book series at a time.
2. Responsibility for the reviewers and editors
Reviewers and editors of submitted manuscripts shall be bound to respect confidentiality and to disclose conflicts of interest with respect to the research, the authors and/or the research funders.
Judgments should be objective, constructive and based on best scientific practice. Reviewers should recommend relevant published work, including audiovisual materials, which are not yet cited.
Reviewers have to respond to a submitted manuscript within a time limit of 6-8 weeks.
Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject or to accept an article drawing on the recommendation of the reviewers. When errors are found, editors have to promote publication of correction or retraction of a paper with mistakes. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
3. Publishing ethics issues
The editorial board has to monitor publishing ethics. Papers submitted that cause ethical conflicts in any of their parts through plagiarism, fraudulent data, or issues that endanger the integrity of any academic record, have to be withdrawn and the authors excluded from further publications. Retraction of a paper follows the reviewers’ recommendation and a majority decision by the editorial board. In the same way, the editorial board precludes business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards. The editorial board is always willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed. Authors as well as readers are invited to address their opinion regarding ethical issues observed as soon as they have been noticed.
1 June, 2018.