Publication Ethics
Editorial Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
AgroPS is committed to safeguarding the integrity of the scholarly record and to ensuring that all stages of manuscript handling, peer review, editorial decision-making, and publication are conducted according to the highest standards of publication ethics, transparency, fairness, and accountability.
1. Duties of Authors
Authors must submit original work that has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal. All authors must have made a substantial scholarly contribution to the manuscript and must approve the final submitted and accepted versions. Authors are responsible for the accuracy of data, methods, citations, and conclusions. Where applicable, authors must disclose funding sources, conflicts of interest, ethical approvals, informed consent, data availability, and the use of generative AI or other assistive technologies.
2. Duties of Reviewers
Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents and must not use, disclose, or circulate any part of a submission outside the review process. Reviews must be objective, evidence-based, respectful, and completed within the agreed timeline. Reviewers should declare any conflict of interest and must decline review when impartial assessment cannot be guaranteed. Reviewers must alert the editors to relevant overlap, plagiarism, citation manipulation, ethical concerns, or unreliable data.
3. Duties of Editors
Editors evaluate manuscripts on academic merit, methodological soundness, relevance to the journal’s scope, and compliance with ethical requirements. Editorial decisions are made without discrimination based on nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, religion, political belief, or any personal characteristic unrelated to scientific quality. Editors must preserve confidentiality, manage conflicts of interest, and ensure that peer review is conducted fairly and transparently.
4. Research Integrity and Misconduct
AgroPS does not tolerate plagiarism, self-plagiarism, duplicate submission, duplicate publication, fabricated or falsified data, image manipulation, inappropriate authorship practices, undeclared conflicts of interest, peer review manipulation, or citation manipulation. When concerns arise, the journal may request explanations, raw data, ethics approvals, author contribution details, or institutional clarification.
5. Screening and Grounds for Rejection
A manuscript may be rejected before or after peer review if it falls outside the journal’s scope; shows serious methodological or ethical weaknesses; contains plagiarism or substantial overlap; lacks essential ethical approval or informed consent; includes unreliable, fabricated, or falsified data; presents manipulated references or images; or fails to comply with the journal’s submission requirements.
6. Confidentiality
All submitted materials, editorial reports, reviewer identities where protected by journal policy, internal correspondence, and decision records are confidential. Editors and reviewers must not upload confidential manuscript content to external tools that cannot guarantee confidentiality and data protection.
7. Conflicts of Interest
Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any financial, institutional, personal, or academic relationship that could influence the preparation, assessment, or decision of a manuscript. Undeclared conflicts may lead to editorial action, including rejection, correction, or retraction.
8. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions
When a published article contains a minor but important error that does not invalidate the overall findings, the journal may issue a correction. When concerns are serious but unresolved, the journal may publish an expression of concern. When findings are unreliable due to misconduct or major error, or when publication ethics have been seriously breached, the journal may retract the article. Retraction notices will remain linked to the article and will clearly state the reason for retraction.
9. Complaints and Appeals
AgroPS provides a formal procedure for complaints and appeals regarding editorial conduct, peer review management, and editorial decisions. Complaints and appeals must be submitted in writing with supporting evidence and will be reviewed according to the journal’s published procedure.
10. Post-publication Issues
The journal welcomes substantiated concerns regarding published content. Allegations related to plagiarism, unethical research, undisclosed conflicts, duplicate publication, or unreliable findings will be assessed confidentially and fairly. The journal may contact authors, reviewers, editors, or institutions where necessary.
11. Use of Generative AI
Generative AI tools cannot be listed as authors. Any permitted use of such tools must be transparently disclosed by the human authors, who remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, legality, and integrity of the manuscript.
12. Final Responsibility
AgroPS reserves the right to take editorial action at any stage of the submission and publication process in order to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.
