Publication Ethics

The Editorial Board aims to shape the scientific journal environment such as ethical publishing practices, inform those involved in the editorial process, and foster informed decision-making by editors so the integrity of our publications is upheld. in addition, publishers and editors take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred; in no event shall a journal or its editors encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place; in the event that a journals publisher or editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct the publisher or editor shall deal with allegations appropriately; the journal should have available guidelines for retracting or correcting articles when needed; and finally publishers and editors should always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.

Editor Roles and Responsibilities

Role of Editorial board members:

  • Review submitted manuscripts.
  • Select reviewers and sent articles to the reviewers aligned with the article topic.
  • Decide and advise for publishing the final reviewed and corrected article of the author. 
  • Decide and advise for choosing and publishing special issues
  • Promote the journal to new authors and encourage submissions.
  • Check plagiarism and any misconduct in the research as well as do the necessary action.

Author and Corresponding Author Responsibilities 

Principles related to authorship with general consensus include the following:

  • Individuals who contributed to the work but whose contributions were not of sufficient magnitude to warrant authorship should be identified by name in an acknowledgements section.
  • All individuals who qualify for authorship or acknowledgement should be identified. Conversely, every person identified as an author or acknowledged contributor should qualify for these roles.
  • Individuals listed as authors should review and approve the manuscript before publication.
  • Editors should require authors and those acknowledged to identify their contributions to the work and make this information available to readers.
  • The ultimate reason for the identification of authors and other contributors is to establish accountability for the reported work.
  • The author should declare any potential conflict of interest exists in this publication.

Authorship should be limited to:

  • Individuals who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.
  • Identification of authors and other contributors is the responsibility of the people who did the work (the researchers) not the people who publish the work (editors, publishers). Researchers should determine which individuals have contributed sufficiently to the work to warrant identification as an author.
  • Individuals listed as authors should review and approve the manuscript before publication.
  • Individuals who contributed to the work but whose contributions were not of sufficient magnitude to warrant authorship should be identified by name in an acknowledgements section.
  • All individuals who qualify for authorship or acknowledgement should be identified. Conversely, every person identified as an author or acknowledged contributor should qualify for these roles.
  • Those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
  • Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

The corresponding author should:

  • Ensure that all appropriate co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper.
  • Give consent to the manuscript submitted for publication.
  • Manage any requests to add, delete or rearrange author names in an article published in an online issue.

The authors should:

  • The author-editor relationship is founded on confidentiality. Authors should hold all communication between themselves and the journal in confidence. Authors should designate a specific contact for all communication about the manuscript throughout peer review and (if accepted) the publication process. Authors should observe journal policy on communication with external peer reviewers (the policy may vary depending on whether a journal uses masked or non-masked peer review) and should observe journal policy on prepublication embargoes.
  • Ensure that they have written entirely original works and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. The authors should provide a statement attesting to the originality of the study they have submitted for consideration. Originality is crucial, because many journals have limited space and editors may give a low priority to studies that, regardless of scientific accuracy and validity, do not advance the scientific enterprise. Some journals may ask authors to provide copies of reports on other studies (articles, manuscripts, and abstracts) related to the study under consideration.
  • Copyright Assignment. Authors are usually expected to assign copyright to the journal publishing their study. Assignment of copyright is a legal document in which the authors assign certain rights to the publisher.
  • Secure the necessary reproduction rights with the rights holder for any third party material (images, digital content, etc.) you have used prior to submission.
  • Ensure that they have acknowledged any funding that has contributed to the publication.
  • Provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access and retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
  • NOT, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.
  • NOT submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
  • Promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
  • Ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them.
  • Obtain appropriate consents, permissions and releases where an author wishes to include case details or other personal information or images of patients and any other individuals.

Human and Animal-Related Study
If the work involves the use of human/animal subjects, each manuscript should contain the following subheadings under the declarations section.

* Provide ethical approval authority name with the reference number. If ethical approval is not required, provide an ethical exemption letter of not required. The author should send scan copy (in pdf) of the ethical approval/exemption letter obtained from the Institutional Review Board (IRB)/ethical committee or institutional head.

* Write a statement of informed consent taken from the participants to publish this research work. The editor may ask to upload a scanned copy if required.

Peer-review Process

Reviewer responsibilities toward authors:

  • Providing written, unbiased feedback in a timely manner on the scholarly merits and the scientific value of the work, together with the documented basis for the reviewers' opinion
  • Indicating whether the writing is clear, concise, and relevant and rating the works composition, scientific accuracy, originality, and interest to the readers of the journal.
  • Avoid personal comments or criticism.
  • Maintaining the confidentiality of the review process: not sharing, discussing with third parties, or disclosing information from the reviewed paper.

Reviewer responsibilities in regards to citations:

  • Recommending the addition of important or relevant published works that are widely available into the citation list.
  • Discouraging the citation of unrelated works.
  • Alerting the authors on the possible errors or misuse of citations whenever necessary.
  • Informing the authors on knowledge of cited works that have been updated or retracted.

Reviewer responsibilities toward editors:

  • Notifying the editor immediately if unable to review in a timely manner and providing the names of potential other reviewers.
  • Alerting the editor about any potential personal or financial conflict of interest and declining to review when a possibility of a conflict exists.
  • Complying with the editor's written instructions on the journal's expectations for the scope, content, and quality of the review.
  • Providing a thoughtful, fair, constructive, and informative critique of the submitted work, which may include supplementary material provided to the journal by the author.
  • Determining scientific merit, originality, and scope of the work; indicating ways to improve it; and recommending acceptance or rejection using whatever rating scale the editor deems most useful.
  • Noting any ethical concerns, such as any violation of accepted norms of ethical treatment of animal or human subjects or substantial similarity between the reviewed manuscript and any published paper or any manuscript concurrently submitted to another journal that may be known to the reviewer.
  • Refraining from direct author contact.


The American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering, and Technology (AJASET) provides electronic archiving and preservation of access to the journal content if the journal is no longer published. According to The PKP Preservation Network (PN), archiving provides free preservation services for any OJS journal that meets a few basic criteria.