Publication Ethics and Misconduct
Heritage Technology and Applied Science (HTAS) is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics, academic integrity, and responsible scholarly communication. This statement defines the ethical responsibilities of authors, editors, editorial board members, peer reviewers, and the publisher throughout the publication process.
HTAS follows recognized principles of publication ethics, including the COPE Core Practices, and is committed to ensuring that editorial and peer-review processes are conducted with integrity, transparency, fairness, confidentiality, and independence.
The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for making final decisions regarding the publication of submitted manuscripts. Decisions are based on the manuscript's scholarly quality, originality, relevance to the journal's scope, methodological rigor, and the recommendations of reviewers and the editorial team.
Editorial decisions must comply with applicable legal and ethical requirements, including those concerning plagiarism, copyright, research integrity, and publication ethics.
Editorial decisions shall be made independently of commercial, financial, institutional, or personal interests. Advertising, sponsorship, reprints, or other commercial activities must not influence editorial decisions or the evaluation of manuscripts.
Editors and reviewers shall evaluate manuscripts based on their academic and intellectual content. No manuscript shall be treated unfairly on the basis of race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, institutional affiliation, political philosophy, or other personal characteristics of the authors.
Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts. Information concerning a manuscript may only be disclosed to individuals directly involved in the editorial and peer-review process.
Unpublished information, data, methods, or ideas contained in submitted manuscripts must not be used for personal or professional advantage without the explicit permission of the authors.
Editors and reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest that could affect their objectivity in handling or reviewing a manuscript. Manuscripts should not be handled by individuals whose personal, professional, financial, collaborative, or competitive relationships may influence the editorial or review process.
Authors must disclose financial support and any substantive conflicts of interest that could influence the research, its interpretation, or its presentation.
Peer reviewers assist the editors in making informed editorial decisions by providing objective, constructive, and scholarly evaluations of submitted manuscripts.
Reviewers should complete their evaluations within the period specified by the journal. If a reviewer is unable to complete a review within the required period, the reviewer should promptly inform the editor.
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, discuss, reproduce, or disclose manuscript content to unauthorized persons.
Reviews should be conducted objectively, respectfully, and constructively. Reviewers should provide clear reasons for their comments and recommendations and should avoid personal criticism of the authors.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been appropriately cited. Reviewers should also notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and other published works of which they are aware.
Reviewers must not use privileged information or ideas obtained during peer review for personal or professional advantage. Reviewers should decline assignments when conflicts of interest may compromise their impartiality.
Authors should present an accurate account of the research conducted and provide an objective discussion of its significance. Data, results, and other research information must be reported accurately. Manuscripts should contain sufficient information and appropriate references to allow the work to be understood and, where applicable, reproduced.
Authors may be requested to provide supporting data or other research materials for editorial assessment when reasonably necessary. Authors should be prepared to provide such information within a reasonable period, subject to applicable ethical, legal, privacy, and confidentiality requirements.
Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts are original works. Any use of the ideas, words, data, figures, or other materials of others must be appropriately acknowledged and cited.
Plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, inappropriate manipulation of data or images, and other forms of academic misconduct are unacceptable.
Manuscripts submitted to HTAS must not have been previously published and must not be under consideration for publication by another journal at the same time. Simultaneous submission to multiple journals is considered unethical.
Authors must properly acknowledge the work of others that has contributed to their research. All publications and other relevant sources that have materially influenced the research should be appropriately cited.
Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, analysis, or interpretation of the research.
All listed authors should have made a meaningful contribution, approved the final version of the manuscript, and agreed to its submission. Individuals who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be appropriately acknowledged.
Where research involves chemicals, procedures, equipment, human participants, animals, or other potentially sensitive or hazardous elements, authors must comply with applicable ethical requirements and clearly report relevant information in the manuscript.
Where applicable, authors should provide information regarding ethical approval, informed consent, or other required safeguards.
All authors should disclose financial support and any other substantive conflicts of interest that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the research or its interpretation.
If authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they should promptly notify the Editor-in-Chief or publisher and cooperate in correcting or retracting the article when necessary.
HTAS does not tolerate academic misconduct or practices that compromise the integrity of scholarly research and publication. Misconduct includes, but is not limited to:
- plagiarism;
- fabrication of data or research results;
- falsification of data, methods, or research findings;
- inappropriate manipulation of data or images;
- duplicate or redundant publication;
- undisclosed conflicts of interest;
- inappropriate authorship practices; and
- other violations of accepted standards of research and publication ethics.
Allegations of misconduct will be considered carefully and handled through appropriate editorial procedures and recognized standards of publication ethics. Where necessary, HTAS may seek clarification or supporting information from authors, reviewers, institutions, or other relevant parties.
HTAS is committed to maintaining the accuracy and reliability of the published scholarly record. When a published article contains a significant error, HTAS may issue a correction, clarification, or retraction as appropriate.
Authors are expected to cooperate with the journal when corrections or retractions are necessary. Editorial decisions concerning corrections or retractions will be made based on the nature and significance of the issue and in accordance with recognized publication ethics standards.
.png)
This work is licensed under a 