CURRENT ISSUE

Ethics and Publication Policy

Responsibilities of Authors


Arnava expects authors to be responsible for the presented data and information in her/his respective paper/article. The authors are expected to present genuine original outcome of their research, and an appropriate and relevant citation should be considered while representing the data and documenting the facts. Authors must provide information which is comprehensible and reproducible. Supporting information such as figures and tables provided by the authors should be legible .

An author should not repeat any previous research data from themselves or anyone else while submitting an original manuscript for considering for publication in the journal. The reported scope of work should be based on proper citation from the other publications. Before submitting any article, authors should double check the scope of the journal and in case of any query they may contact the Editors.

Authors should strictly adhere to the authorship criteria. All listed authors must have made a significant contribution to the research presented in the manuscript and approved all its claims. Any person to be considered as an author of an original research article must have contributed in any of the following ways: designed the study, executed the study or conducted the experiments, have taken part in analyzing the data, supported in documenting the article and drawing the conclusion, spearheaded the project as a principal investigator. It is mandatory to include everyone who made a significant contribution towards the completion of the research work.

Any financial or personal interest that governs the findings or research in the manuscript along with the details of financial support and its sources should be revealed. Through the submission of an article the respective authors agrees that the article neither is under consideration nor published in any other journal.

Responsibilities of Reviewers


Confidentiality:
Reviewers should not share any information from an assigned manuscript with outsiders without the prior permission from the Editor or preserve the data from an assigned manuscript.

Competence:
Reviewer with fair expertise should complete the review. Assigned Reviewer with inadequate expertise should feel responsible and may decline the review as it is presumed that reviewer will be an expert in the respective field.

Constructive assessment:
Reviewer comments should appreciate positive aspects of the work, identify negative aspects constructively, and indicate the enhancement needed. A reviewer should explain and support his or her judgment clearly enough that Editors and Authors can understand the basis of the comments. The reviewer should ensure that an observation or argument that has been previously reported be accompanied by a relevant citation and should immediately alert the Editor when he or she becomes aware of duplicate publication. Judgment of each article should be done without any bias and personal interest by the assigned reviewer.

Impartiality and Integrity:
Reviewer's decision should solely depend on scientific merit, relevance to the subject, scope of the journal.

Timeliness and responsiveness:
Reviewers should morally abide to provide the review comments within the stipulated time and be active enough in responding to the queries raised by the editor if any.

Responsibilities of Editor and Editorial Board
Editors have a responsibility to maintain the integrity of the published literature, if required,by publishing errata or corrections identifying anything of significance, retractions, and expressions of concern as quickly as possible. Editor must comply with the policy guidelines provided by the publisher and fulfill the responsibilities bestowed upon with integrity.

Review process:
Editors are responsible for monitoring and ensuring the fairness, timeliness, thoroughness, and civility of the peer-review editorial process.

Towards Readers and Scientific Community
  • To ensure that the content or the author information present in the manuscript is legible.
  • To evaluate all manuscripts such that they fall within the scope of the journal.
  • Maintain the journals internal integrity by suggesting the corrections, dealing with retraction, supplemental data etc.
Journal Role

Decision-Making: He/she is entitled to carry out decision-making in consultation with reviewers or members of the editorial board.

Impartiality: An Editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without any bias towards race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality: The Editor or any Editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.

Publisher Role
Arnava published by the Arnava Shodh Sanstha follows timely rigorous peer review process to bring the latest data and facts at its best possible mode. As a publisher the following policies are being considered:
  • Supporting fair and timely Peer review process with the valuable inputs.
  • Making constructive recommendations for improving the overall process along with better production support.
  • The publisher ensures the smooth functioning of the web development, web management, social media management for journals and articles.

    • Guidelines for Retracting Articles

    Arnava take the responsibility to maintain the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record of the content for all end users very seriously. The journal place great importance on the authority of articles after they have been published..

    It is a general principle of scholarly communication that the Editor of a learned journal is solely and independently responsible for deciding which article could be published out of the submitted articles in a particular time. In making this decision, the Editors are guided by the policies of the journal's Editorial board. An outcome of this principle is the importance of the scholarly archive as a permanent, historic record of the transactions of scholarship. Articles that have been published shall remain extant, exact and unaltered as far as possible.

    Article rejection: If any article at the stage of consideration for publication by any means, represents infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submissions, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or similar incidences, the article may be withdrawn depending on the Editor's discretion. In this regard, Editor's decision will be final.

    Article retraction: Infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submissions, sham claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data and similar claims will lead to return back of an article. Occasionally, a retraction may be considered to correct errors in submission or publication.

    Errors, inaccurate or misleading statements must be corrected promptly and with due prominence. The core objective of these measures is necessary to maintain the integrity of the academic record

©Arnava Shodh Sanstha
PREVIOUS ISSUE