Malpractice Statement

The Journal of Science, Technology, and Arts Research (STAR Journal) is dedicated to maintaining the integrity of the scientific record.

The STAR Journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The journal adheres to the COPE guidelines on handling potential acts of malpractice. COPE offers a variety of services and products primarily for editors and publishers of academic journals, as well as for providing advice and guidance on best practices for addressing ethical challenges in journal publishing. COPE advises editors and publishers on all facets of publishing ethics and, in practice, on managing instances of research and publication misconduct.

Every member of the STAR Journal's editorial staff, including authors and reviewers, has committed to upholding the highest ethical standards and acknowledged their personal responsibility for fulfilling the obligations and duties outlined in the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors (https://publicationethics.org/).

Our key expectations of editors, peer-reviewers, and authors, and the penalty for malpractice are as follows:

Editors' Responsibilities

  • Initial Manuscript Screening: Editors conduct an initial "desk review" to ensure a submission fits within the journal's aims and scope and meets basic formatting and quality requirements. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be "desk rejected" immediately to save time for both authors and reviewers.
  • Peer-Review Management:

Selecting Reviewers: Identifying and inviting independent experts who have no conflict of interest with the authors to evaluate the work.

Monitoring Progress: Ensuring the review process is fair, thorough, and completed on time.

Mediation: Interpreting conflicting reviewer reports and mediating between authors and reviewers when disagreements arise.

  • Decision Making: After reviewing the reports, editors make the final decision to accept, reject, or request revisions. This decision is based on merit, originality, and validity, regardless of the author's background.
  • Upholding Ethical Standards: Editors are responsible for identifying and addressing issues like plagiarism, data fabrication, and duplicate submissions. They also ensure that research involving humans or animals has received appropriate ethical approval.
  • Journal Development and Strategy: Editors define the journal's vision, recruit new members to the editorial board, and identify emerging trends to include in special themed issues

Reviewers' Responsibilities

  • Constructive Feedback: Provide an honest, unbiased assessment of the research. This includes identifying both strengths and weaknesses and suggesting specific ways to improve the manuscript.
  • Scientific Rigor & Validity: Evaluate the methodology to ensure it is sound and reproducible. Reviewers check if the data support the conclusions and if the research question is clearly addressed.
  • Confidentiality: Treat all manuscripts as "privileged communication". Reviewers must not share the manuscript, use its data for personal gain, or even reveal they are reviewing it without editorial permission.
  • Ethical Vigilance: Alert the editor to potential misconduct, such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or duplicate publication. They also ensure that ethical approvals for human or animal research are clearly documented.
  • Timeliness: Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe (usually 2–4 weeks). If a delay is unavoidable, they must notify the editor immediately.

Authors' Responsibilities

  • Core Authorship Criteria

Substantial Contribution: To the conception, design, or acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data.

Intellectual Drafting: Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content.

Final Approval: Approving the final version before it is published.

Accountability: Agreeing to be held accountable for all aspects of the work to ensure its accuracy and integrity.

  • Ethical Responsibilities

Originality & Plagiarism: Authors must certify that their work is entirely original and that any ideas or words from others are appropriately cited. Plagiarism in any form—including self-plagiarism (text-recycling)—is strictly prohibited.

Exclusivity: A manuscript must not be under consideration by any other journal at the same time.

Data Integrity: Authors must present an accurate account of the research performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Fabrication or falsification of data is considered serious misconduct.

Disclosure of Conflicts: Authors are obligated to disclose any financial or personal relationships that might bias their work (e.g., funding, employment, or stock ownership).

Research Ethics: For studies involving humans or animals, authors must provide proof of Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethics Committee approval and confirm that informed consent was obtained.

  • Operational Responsibilities

Manuscript Preparation: Authors must strictly adhere to the journal's guidelines on word count, citation style, and other requirements.

Data Retention: Authors are often required to keep their raw data for several years (usually 3–10) and make it available upon reasonable request from the editor or other researchers.

Peer Review Participation: Authors must respond to reviewer comments thoroughly and submit revised versions within the specified timeframe.

Error Correction: If an author discovers a significant error in their published work, they have a professional duty to notify the editor to issue a correction or retraction promptly.

  • Key Roles within the Author Group

Corresponding Author: Acts as the primary point of contact between the journal and all co-authors. They are responsible for ensuring all co-authors have approved the submission and managing all post-publication inquiries.

Submitting Author: The individual who physically uploads the files into the journal's submission system 

Non-Author Contributors: Individuals who provided technical help, writing assistance, or general support but do not meet the full authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments section

  • Penalty for malpractice

     Once the investigation is complete, the journal takes action based on the severity of the  findings:

For authors

Dismissal: If the allegations are unfounded or deemed an "honest error," no action is taken (or a minor correction is issued).

Expression of Concern: If there is strong evidence of a problem but the investigation is lengthy, the journal may issue a public "warning" note on the article.

Retraction: If misconduct is proven, the paper is formally retracted. The original PDF remains, but is clearly watermarked "RETRACTED."

Sanctions: Journals may ban the authors from submitting to that journal (or a family of journals) for a set period (e.g., 1–5 years).

For Reviewers

Removal from Database: The most immediate action is to strip the reviewer and author roles from the STAR Journal.

For Editors

Dismissal: Editors can be removed from their positions and all their roles by the  Journal’s Board.