Publication Ethics

Lex Publica is a peer-reviewed journal committed to upholding strict standards of publication ethics. We adhere to the principles of publication ethics standards adopted from the COPE guidelines. All articles that do not comply with these standards will be removed from publication at any time, even after publication. In accordance with the code of conduct, we will report any cases of suspected plagiarism or the publication of duplicates to the appropriate authorities. Lex Publica reserves the right to use plagiarism detection software to screen submitted papers at any time. Editors, authors, and reviewers must be fully committed to good publishing practice and accept responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities as specified.

Author’s responsibilities:

• Reporting Standards. Authors must present an accurate account of the original research conducted as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers must present their results honestly and without fabricating, falsifying, or otherwise inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. False or intentionally inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts must follow journal submission guidelines.
• Originality and Plagiarism. Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. Manuscripts may not be submitted simultaneously to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publish. Relevant previous works and publications, whether by other researchers or those of the author, should be acknowledged and properly referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original words taken directly from publications by other researchers must appear in quotation marks with appropriate citations.
• Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications. In general, authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. It is also hoped that the authors will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. The various publications arising from a research project should be clearly identified, and the main publications should be referenced.
• Acknowledgment of Sources. Authors must acknowledge all data sources used in the study and cite publications that were influential in determining the nature of the work reported. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.
• Authorship of the Paper. The writing of research publications must accurately reflect the individual’s contribution to his work and reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, conduct, or interpretation of the reported research. Others who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors, those who made less substantial or purely technical contributions to research or publications are listed in the acknowledgment section. The author also ensures that all authors have seen and approved the submitted version of the manuscript and the inclusion of their names as co-authors.
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest. All authors must clearly disclose in their manuscripts any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
• Fundamental Errors in Published Works. If the author finds significant errors or inaccuracies in the submitted manuscript, the author must immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and work closely with the editor to retract or correct the article.
• Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects. Authors must clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have unusual hazards inherent in their use.

Reviewer’s Responsibilities:

• Confidentiality. Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors must be kept confidential and treated as privileged information. Accepted manuscripts may not be shown or discussed with others except as permitted by the editor.
• Acknowledgment of Sources. Reviewers should ensure that the authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the study. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported must be accompanied by a relevant citation. Reviewers should immediately notify the journal’s editorial department if they discover irregularities, have concerns about the ethical aspects of the work, become aware of substantial similarities between the manuscript and concurrent submissions with other published journals or articles, or suspect that infringement may have occurred during the course of research or writing and manuscript submission. Reviewers should keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal requests further information or advice.
• Standards of Objectivity. Reviews of submitted manuscripts should be conducted objectively, and reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should follow the journal’s instructions on the specific feedback required from them unless there is a good reason not to. Reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help authors to improve their manuscripts. The reviewer should clarify any additional investigations that are suggested and deemed necessary to support the claims made in the manuscript under consideration, which will only strengthen or prolong the work.
• Disclosure and Conflict of Interest. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest arising from competition, collaboration, or any other relationship or connection with the author, company, or institution to which the paper is connected. In the case of a double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author(s), the reviewer must notify the journal’s editorial board if their findings create a potential conflict of interest.
• Promptness. Reviewers must respond within the allotted timeframe. Reviewers only agree to review the manuscript if they are reasonably certain that they can return the review within the proposed or mutually agreed timeframe and promptly notify the journal if they require an extension. If a reviewer finds it impossible to complete the manuscript review within the allotted time, then this should be communicated to the editor so that the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.

Editor’s responsibilities:

• Fair Play. Editors evaluate manuscripts at all times for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors.
• Confidentiality. Editors and any editorial staff may not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the relevant authors, reviewers, prospective reviewers, other editorial advisors, and appropriate publishers.
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest. Unpublished material disclosed in submitted manuscripts may not be used in the editor’s own research without the author’s written consent.
• Publication Decisions. The editorial board is responsible for deciding which articles are submitted to the journal for publication. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive such decisions. Editors may be guided by the discretion of the journal’s editorial board and limited by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
• Reviews of Manuscripts. The editor must ensure that the editor initially evaluates each manuscript to ensure its originality. Editors must regulate and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors must describe their peer review process in information to authors and also indicate which sections of the journal the peer reviewers are reviewing. Editors should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers being considered for publication by selecting persons with adequate expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.