International Journal of Motor Control and Learning
Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

 | Post date: 2019/10/5 | 
  • On behalf of all co-authors, I certify as a corresponding author by accepting the following statement: 
  • I have read and followed the applicable author instructions, the publication ethics policy, and the conflicts of interest disclosure. 
  • I further grant the journal copyright of my manuscript and any other data intended for publication in the manuscript and will not submit or publish any part in any form or language if the article is accepted for publication. 
  • I have obtained permission from the copyright holders for all portions of the copyrighted works included and have credited the sources in my article. 
  • The article I submitted for journal review is an original, written by the authors listed, and has not been published anywhere. 
  • Once a manuscript has been deposited, it cannot be withdrawn or otherwise transmitted.
  • The article will not be considered for publication in another journal and will not be subject to such peer review if it is peer reviewed in that journal. 
  • Even with prior acceptance the editors reserve the right to edit or reject submitted manuscripts for reasons of English grammar, clarity, lack of space, journal style, or preferably the editors. 
  • The journal may not wish to publish or disclose the reason for a manuscript's rejection. The editorial team, or publisher are not responsible for any omissions or errors in published manuscripts related to the content disclosed therein, including but not limited to drug dosage, methodology, surgical technique, etc. Offenders (patient identity disclosure, research ethics, etc.).
  • The cover letter should include a statement that the study is consistent with current ethical considerations. Authors reporting experimental human studies should include a statement in the Materials and Methods section of the manuscript that: 
  • Informed consent was obtained from each subject involved in the study, 
  • the study protocol conformed to the ethical guidelines of the Statement of Helsinki 1975, as reflected in the prior approval by the Institute's Human Research Committee. 
  • Any experimental or clinical trial may raise ethical disputes (e.g., institutional ethical approval for animal or human research). Therefore, the editors of the journal expect all authors, reviewers and editors to consider the reporting guidelines of COPE, ICMJE and Réseau Equateur in the field of medical ethics and scientific writing.  If any, authors should state related declaration(s), otherwise, the following sentence should be given: “None be declared”.
Animal Rights
When experimenting on animals, ensure that all animals are cared for according to the criteria in the "Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals" prepared by (NIH Publication 86-23 revised 1985 right). When conducting animal studies, we undertake to comply with the Basel Declaration, which sets out the fundamental and ethical guidelines of the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (ICLAS). At the time of submission, you MUST enter an approval code. Otherwise we have to "quickly reject" such requests at an early stage.

Informed Consent
Submitting informed consent is required for all human studies. Informed consent should be reported in the Methods section of the manuscript. In the case of studies involving live animals or humans, the author must also declare that all experiments were conducted in accordance with applicable laws and institutional guidelines, and identify the institutional committees that approved the experiments.

Author Contribution
Authorship must be restricted to the ones who have made a substantial contribution to the conception, idea, implementation, or interpretation of the study. All who have made significant contributions are to be included as co-authors. If there are other people who have contributed to certain aspects of the content of the article, they should be mentioned in the acknowledgments section.

Plagiarism and Similarity Rates
  • IJMCL review submitted manuscripts using iThenticate to indicates the proportion of plagiarized content in a research article.
  • Authors must ensure that they have written only original works and, if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that they have been properly cited or quoted.
  • We recommend that reviewers carefully screen and check for similarities in the review process, and advise authors on how to avoid similarities with other published material. The most important task of reviewers and contributing editors is to compare files with the editor's selection.
  • There is no accepted predetermined level of similarity, since each sentence in a scientific paper must be unique for new discoveries. In some cases, we do not accept any whose similarity coefficient exceeds 8-10%.
  • We accept all COPE conditions related to similarity and plagiarism scores and whether attempted plagiarism will be considered with convincing evidence. Therefore, we work on the basis of the schemes and workflows developed by COPE. The trade journal EIC has the ultimate responsibility to check and avoid plagiarism. Quick Reject, Reject, Retraction and Retraction are our approach to high similarity items.
Republishing Policy
The re-publishing is considered plagiarism in IJMCL.
IJMCL expressly encourages authors not to submit articles or variations of articles that have already been published elsewhere, even in languages ​​other than English. In particular, articles published in local journal (in the local language) cannot be published in the IJMCL.

Data Fabrication and Falsification
Data fabrication means that no research has actually been done and the data is fake or the data obtained from the experiment has been manipulated and is not real data. In these cases, the editors of the journal have the right to ask the authors for data to clarify the issue.

Salami Publication
Salami slicing or salami or segmented publication is a particular form of redundant publication, usually characterized by similarity in assumptions, methodology, or results but not similarity in text.  the Salami Slicing case is even worse than double posting because it is not easily traceable, which the authors unfairly credit.
Identifying this type of publishing misconduct is difficult because salami publications often do not contain plagiarized text. Only in the rare cases where both an original manuscript and a Salami manuscript are found, some editors or reviewers might suspect a Salami publication.
What does the COPE flowchart say about the redundant publication:
Access the level of overlap between the two items using the EIC.
For "high overlap": Reject article.
If "slightly overlapping": Request further clarification from the authors and possibly a "correction" or an "errata" or a "comment"
Note: It is recommended that the editor refer to the "sample letters" on the COPE website. Due to the lack of transparency of the authors, this matter should be brought to the author's institution.
If there is a risk to the health of the community, the article should be retracted after a thorough investigation and sufficient evidence.
Due to the risk of litigation and the risk of harming other innocent contributors, COPE strongly discourages blacklisting authors or sharing warning lists with other editors.
Note to authors:
  • Avoid mis-splitting data from one study into two or more articles.
  • Be transparent when submitting an article.
  • Submit copies of all manuscripts that are closely related to the manuscript you are considering. Includes all manuscripts that have been published, recently submitted, or already accepted.
Retraction Regulations
The retraction is a public statement about an earlier statement that will be removed from the journal. The retraction may be initiated by the journal's editors or by the author(s) of the paper. However, since the editors are responsible for the journal's content, they always decide to retract the material. The journal editors may retract publications even if all or some authors refuse to retract the publication.
Only published items can be retracted. Publications should be removed as soon as possible if journal editors believe the publication has serious flaws that included:
  • Plagiarism
  • Bogus claims of authorship
  • Multiple submission
  • Fraudulent use of data
  • Infringements of professional, ethical codes
  • Redundant publication
  • Failure to disclose a significant competing interest
Should retraction be applied when disputed authorship?
Authors sometimes request that articles be withdrawn if their authorship is questioned after publication. Do not remove a publication just because of an authorship dispute unless you have reason to question the validity of the results or the reliability of the data. In such cases, the publisher of the journal must inform those involved in the dispute that it cannot rule on such matters. However, they may be willing to publish a correction to the author/co-author list if the authors/co-authors (or their institutions) provide sufficient evidence that such a change is warranted.
Article Retraction Process in IJMCL:
A retraction note entitled "Retraction: [article title]" signed by the authors and/or the editor is published in the paginated part of a subsequent issue of the journal and listed in the contents list.
In the electronic version, a link is made to the original article.
The original article is retained unchanged, saving for a watermark on the .pdf file version on each page to indicate that it is "retracted."
The HTML version of the document is removed. Only the abstract will have remained.
The retraction has no separate fee.

Withdrawal Regulations
Withdrawal is an action that removes a manuscript from the review process and places it back in the author's dashboard. In general, IJMCL do not recommend Withdrawal an article as it wastes valuable manuscript processing time, expense, and editorial work.
Because of the critical role of editors in accepting or rejecting an article, there are rare instances of published articles requiring some form of cancellation at a later date. This decision is only made after a detailed checking of the individual case and is the result of a fair and conscientious evaluation by the editor-in-chief.
An article withdrawal applies to articles that have been submitted through the peer review process or accepted for publication and are currently only available as "In Press". Sometimes they contain errors or are articles that may have already been published and then mistakenly resubmitted for publication elsewhere. On rare occasions, these articles may fail to meet established ethical requirements, the authors' contribution statements are contradictory, or data of questionable reliability are presented, etc. Articles may also be withdrawn to allow authors to correct errors made before submission were recognized.
Withdrawal Steps:
Pre-Review: This is the period during which the author(s) submit their article for submission by the reviewer. Authors may withdraw their articles at this stage at no cost and/or compelling reason.
Under Review: This is the period when the manuscript is fully uploaded to the website and included in the peer review process. Authors must have valid reasons for withdrawal.
In Press: This is the period of time between accepting an article and submitting it for publication if the article meets the journal's standards. Authors must have valid reasons for withdrawal.
(There are no fees for withdrawal in any stage).
Post-publication: when the article is published (online and/or print). withdrawing is not possible at all at this stage.
To submit your withdrawal request, please send email to: infoijmcl.com

Editorial Independence
All editors and reviewers of IJMCL are completely independent of the publisher and can make decisions without interference from the owners or the publisher of the journal. " CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JOURNAL PUBLISHERS " helps us make research integrity visible from the submission to publication of the most influential research. We therefore undertake to apply all parts of this code in our internal processes.
Principles of Editorial Independence:
The directors are members of scientific institutions and their remuneration is independent of the activities of the journal.
They are not paid for their journal work and are free to choose this additional fee. Therefore, they are completely independent of their role in the IJMCL.
The journal's decision-making process is completely independent of Publisher.
On the other hand, we don't pay our editors either. Accordingly, any concerns or complaints about our editors will be escalated to the journal owner.
We always recommend or suggest that our editors improve the quality of their work.

Editorial Responsibilities
Conflict of Interest Disclosure: Any relationship, financial, personal or otherwise, to the EIC that may create a conflict of interest with the EIC's role must be disclosed on the Journal's website.
Peer Review Process: The IEC should ensure that all accepted articles have been reviewed according to the journal's peer review policy, with at least two experts for certain short articles such as editorials or letters.
Prohibition of CoI in peer review: Neither the EIC nor publishers should make decisions on manuscripts where they may have a conflict of interest. In such cases, the senior editor should take responsibility for overseeing the peer review and deciding whether to approve or deny it.
Editorial author: The EIC must undertake to publish as few publications as possible in its journal.
Respect for Human and Animal Rights in All Publications: The EIC must ensure that any human or live animal studies accepted for publication in the Journal are ethical and in accordance with the World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki. Studies must meet the National and Institutional Review Board (IRB) requirements for authors for ethical approval and informed consent. In countries where there are no local or national IRBs or established regulations, the EIC should use the standards set out in the Declaration of Helsinki to decide whether there are any ethical concerns associated with conducting the research requiring their publication would prevent. Any study violating the Declaration of Helsinki must be reported to the author's institution, whether or not it has local IRB approval.
Respect ethics in all publications: The EIC must ensure that any research involving human or animal tissue accepted for publication in the journal complies with national laws and, in particular, the requirements of the local Institutional Review Board regarding the use of that tissue for research purposes correspond with regard to the consent in favor of human tissue.
 Time considerations and reduction of waiting time for authors: The EIC should be responsible for reducing the length of the review process and the acceptance or rejection time. Correspondence must be dealt with promptly and respectfully, and an efficient and thorough peer review must be conducted. Systems should be in place to ensure absences of editorial staff do not affect service to authors.
Publishing Ethics: The EIC must comply with the World Association of Medical Editors' (WAME) statement on geopolitical interference in editorial decisions. In addition, EIC is required to practice ethics in the journal based on the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors published by the Publications Ethics Committee (COPE). The EIC is required to follow COPE guidelines and flowcharts when addressing publicationand research ethics issues such as author disputes and bad behavior. IJMCL ensures that publication ethics are adhered to according to COPE standards.
Appeals Approach: The EIC must have a written journal grievance procedure in place to cover appeals against decisions and grievances about the journal's processes. Complaints against the EIC are first referred to an ombudsman, but can also be referred to COPE if necessary.

Publishing Ethics Issues
All editors, reviewers and authors must acknowledge and adhere to the principles established by COPE.
The corresponding author is the primary owner of the article, so he can withdraw the article if it is incomplete (before going through the review process or when review is needed).
Authors may not make material changes to an article after acceptation without valid reason.
All editors and authors must publish all corrections truthfully and completely.
All reports of plagiarism, false data or other types of fraud must be fully reported and will be thoroughly investigated in accordance with COPE guidelines.

Allegations of Misconduct
IJMCL is very aware of potential abuse when researching or publishing. The journal follow COPE's policy on handling suspected misconduct. There are two ways to report misconduct to us (pre-publication or post-publication): Submit a report through infoijmcl.com and  post a comment on the article page (post-publication review). An editor will edit this comment. All objections and complaints are electronically recorded and reviewed by our support team. Depending on the question, it is presented to all interested parties and discussed in the first weekly meeting of the Chief Ethics Committee. The central ethics committee is based at the publisher and comprises the journal owner, the publisher and the publisher's representative. High priority submissions are primarily reviewed and processed by the publisher's CEO. After collecting all materials and consulting all parties, the editor will communicate the initial decision to all authors. The final defense and documents, along with the required written documents, are forwarded to the Sub-Ethics Committee, composed of members of the Preparatory Committee and publisher' Advisory and Guardianship Council. We respect whistleblowers among our readers and take every care to protect their confidential information. In the event of proven research or publishing misconduct, we always follow COPE's organizational charts, which range from issuing a corrigendum to retiring, retiring, or even replacing responsible journal staff.
IJMCL follow the COPE guidelines for appeals against journal publisher decisions and complaints about the editorial management of the journal review process. Please pay attention to this page.
You can send us a complaint or objection in the following ways:
1) E-mail: infoijmcl.com
2) Post-Publication Comments: Every reader can post a comment on any article's page (Post Publication Peer Review). This comment will be managed and forwarded to editor-in-chief.

Complaints and Appeals
IJMCL follow the COPE guidelines on appeals to journal editor decisions and complaints about a journal's editorial management of the peer-review process.
Submit a complaint
1) Dear readers, you can also anonymously initiate a discussion about a decision of the EIC. In this case, describe in detail the subject of the complaint and attach detailed documentation.
2)  The standard investigation process can take up to four weeks after you submit your report.
3) Any new report related to a complaint or appeal will be reviewed in advance by the “Head of Ethics Service”. If further material is required, we will contact the corresponding author and his institution. After collecting the data, we forward it to our “Ethics Department”. This body consists of:
  • The managing director of the publisher
  • Two representatives of the owner of the journal
  • The editor-in-chief of the journal
4) The preliminary decision of this ethics committee will be sent to all authors with a deadline of 7 working days for the submission of proposals. In the event of an objection from the authors or the complexity of the matter, we will simultaneously forward this to a second committee composed of another member of the national ethics committee and an official representative of a related or affiliated institution or an associate lawyer, as well as COPE Council (after anonymization) .
5) Pending a conclusion, we will refrain from further action.
6) All conclusions of COPE and the second ethics committee (previous paragraph) are subject to our decision and must be implemented by all parties.
COPE flowcharts about Complaints and appeals:
What to do if you suspect peer review manipulation
Image manipulation in a published article
Systematic manipulation of the publication process

Conflicts of Interest (CoI)
Policy:
Conflicts of Interest (CoI) include those that may not be fully apparent and could affect the judgment of the author, reviewers, and editors. They have been described as such which, if later revealed, would leave a reasonable reader feeling misled or deceived. They can be personal, business, political, academic or financial.
Conflict of Interest is required for all article types.
Authors must provide information about any significant financial interest or dispute within the past five years and for the foreseeable future.
Authors without a significant financial interest are asked to declare that they have no financial interest in the manuscript material.
The conflict of interest must be clearly defined (at the time of submission) to avoid overlooking or misleading potential interests. The declared conflict of interest does not automatically lead to the rejection of the article, but the editors reserve the right to publish the conflict of interest declared with the acceptance.
Financial and non-financial interests are defined as two types of competing interests:
1) Competing financial interests:
The author(s) must clearly identify one of the following:
Funding: Research support (including salaries, equipment, materials, and other expenses). The specific role of the funder in the manuscript should be disclosed.
Employment: Recent (if involved in a research project), current or prospective employment with an organization that could gain or lose financially from this publication.
Personal Financial Interest: What you may gain or lose financially by publication of study. Fees for consulting or other forms of remuneration (including reimbursement of expenses for attending conferences).
For patents and patent applications, the following information must be disclosed: patent applicant (author or institution), inventor's name, application number, application status, particular aspect of the patent application manuscript.
2) Competing non-financial interests:
Competing non-financial interests can take many forms, including personal or professional relationships with organizations and individuals. Authors and reviewers are encouraged to disclose unpaid roles or relationships that may affect the publication process.
Management of Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest Prior to Disclosure:
During the review process: We do not “accept or disclose” any type of undisclosed conflicts of interest.
Post-publication approach to undisclosed conflicts of interest: Based on the COPE framework:
If the authors have denied any conflicts of interest: notify readers by retracting the article.
If the authors have provided relevant details: correct the EIC Conflict of Interest Statement as necessary.

Expressions of Concern
An expression of concern (EOC) is a correction or errata issued at the editors' discretion to inform readers of a serious concern or potentially misleading information about a published article. In most cases, we conduct a suspicious investigation before issuing an alert. However, on rare occasions, we may issue an EOC as a notice. In rare cases, an EOC may be issued during an investigation, but a decision is unavailable for an extended period of time.
The EOC is written by the editor-in-chief of the journal. Once published, the EOC is placed at the top of the article's web page and linked to the article's publication record, just like an edit. Publishing an EOC does not change the published status of the linked article. After the publication of an EOC, the same article may be revised or withdrawn, or the EOC itself may be amended or withdrawn, depending on the editorial board's evaluation of the information, data and/or materials in subsequent discussions. We also try to notify the authors of the article in question prior to publishing the EOC, but do not require the authors' permission or consent. We undertake to publish the data or other materials received from the authors as EOC Supporting Files; In these cases, authors will be consulted and may choose not to publish their files/materials, although this may influence the publishers' decision to resolve the EOC issue.
IJMCL may notify interested third parties of your concerns. This may include, for example, the author's institution(s) and their repository or another journal/editor whose article is relevant. IJMCL publishes the EOC as a new article with correction letter type and provides a link to the preliminary article.
 
View: 3919 Time(s)   |   Print: 700 Time(s)   |   Email: 0 Time(s)   |   0 Comment(s)

© 2025 CC BY 4.0 | International Journal of Motor Control and Learning

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb