Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement

TECS regards the integrity of the published record as a shared obligation. As a COPE member, the journal follows the COPE Core Practices and draws on the DOAJ and OASPA standards. The duties below apply to everyone involved in publication.

Obligations of editors

Editors decide which manuscripts to publish on the basis of scholarly and technical merit and fit with scope, free from discrimination or commercial pressure; treat submissions in confidence; recuse themselves where they hold a competing interest; and respond promptly and openly to credible concerns, issuing corrections, expressions of concern, retractions or apologies where the record requires it.

Obligations of authors

Authors warrant that their work is original and properly attributed; that it is not under consideration elsewhere and does not duplicate prior work beyond a properly disclosed and substantially extended earlier version; that data, code and results are reported accurately, with no fabrication, falsification or improper manipulation; that authorship reflects genuine contribution; and that conflicts of interest, funding, ethics approvals and any use of generative AI are disclosed. Authors must notify the journal promptly of any significant error found after publication.

Obligations of reviewers and the publisher

Reviewers maintain confidentiality, declare competing interests, assess objectively and report suspected breaches. Scholar Publishing upholds the journal’s editorial independence, provides for secure archiving and continued availability, and supports editors in investigating misconduct.

Research and publication misconduct

Allegations — of plagiarism, data or result fabrication or falsification, image or figure manipulation, redundant or duplicate publication, undisclosed overlap with a conference version, citation manipulation, or undisclosed conflicts — are examined in line with the applicable COPE flowcharts, whether the work is at submission or already published. Those concerned are given a fair opportunity to respond, and substantiated cases may lead to rejection, correction, an expression of concern, retraction and, where appropriate, notification of the authors’ institution or funder.