Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement

JCAM is committed to maintaining the absolute highest standards of publication ethics and follows the core principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All participating parties—authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, and the publisher (NEO-ART EXCELLENCE HUB PRIVATE LIMITED)—must agree to these defined standards of ethical behavior.

Duties of Authors

  • Originality & Transparencies: Authors must present accurate data from original research. Fraudulent, fabricated, or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute highly unethical behavior and are completely unacceptable.
  • Multiple Submissions: Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is unethical.
  • Authorship Attribution: Authorship must be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All co-authors must approve the final version of the paper before submission.
  • Hazards and Human/Animal Subjects: Authors must clearly declare compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki and provide explicit institutional ethics committee approval numbers for all human or animal trials.

Duties of Editors

  • Fair Play: Editors evaluate submissions purely based on scientific merit without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
  • Confidentiality: Editors will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, designated reviewers, and the publisher.
  • Conflict Resolution: Editors will take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints or cases of suspected research misconduct are raised regarding a submitted or published paper, following COPE flowcharts.

Duties of Reviewers

  • Contribution to Decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial choices and assists the author in improving the paper.
  • Objectivity: Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is entirely inappropriate; critiques must be supported by clear arguments and scientific facts.