Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Advances in Earth Science follows the accepted ethics of publishing. Adopt double-blind review system to strictly control the quality of articles, and prevent plagiarism, multiple submissions of one manuscript, writing papers, third-party submissions, unreasonable signatures and other academic misconducts.
Advances in Earth Science (including print and electronic versions, the same below) and all content published on this website, including articles, pictures, photos, charts, layouts, column names, catalogues, etc., its copyright, trademark rights, The publishing copyright and other related rights belong to the copyright owner or the corresponding right owner, and are protected by Chinese laws and international conventions that China has joined.
It is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer and the publisher.
The publication of an article in a peer reviewed journal is an essential model for our journal Advances in Earth Science. We crack down on multiple submissions, plagiarism and other academic misconduct to ensure the scientific nature and innovation of scientific papers.
1. Misconduct in manuscript writing and submission
(1) Data falsification. Fabricate, forge or tamper with data or other research results.
(2) Content plagiarism and plagiarism. Taking possession of the whole or fragments (including words, pictures, tables, data, etc.) of others' published or unpublished works, copying or copying in disguised form; Publish/publish the cooperative research results as their own independent results.
(3) Repeated publication. In the absence of any explanation, oneself (or oneself as one of the authors) already published papers, intact or minor modification or adjustment, submit again.
(4) More than one draft. Submit the same paper to multiple journals simultaneously; Submit the paper to another journal within the agreed review period or response period.
2. Misconduct in references and annotations
(1) Citing the contents of the literature without indicating the literature. Using or quoting opinions, arguments, data, figures, charts, formulas, etc. published by others or myself, without indicating the source; Mixing the arguments and arguments published by others or myself with my own arguments and arguments without clearly distinguishing and marking; Using unpublished achievements of others or parts extracted from foreign materials without indicating the source, etc.
(2) False references. False citation labeling without quoting others' literature.
(3) References are quoted without reading and verification. Quotes from other sources without reading the original text.
(4) Incomplete references. Due to differences in academic views, language barriers and other reasons, they deliberately do not cite important research results or literature related to the paper, or cite others' research out of context.
3. Misconduct in authorship
(1) Not signed according to the author's contribution. The author's signature and order fail to reflect the author's contribution and responsibility to the article, and the author is added or deleted without reason or the order of signature is adjusted in the process of manuscript processing.
(2) "name" and "signature". Attribution of an uncontributed person as an author as a gift or attribution of an author without the consent of the other person.
The journal (including print and electronic editions, same below) and all contents of the website, including articles, pictures, photos, graphics, layout, and list of column names, classification, and their copyright or related rights are owned by their respective rights or corresponding rights holders. That is subject to China and China's accession to the International Convention on the protection of the law.
4. Author responsibilities
(1) Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
(2) Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and forward-looking. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged.
(3) Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
(4) Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
(5) It is not allowed to provide false peer review information. Authors should complete their own papers. The "third party" to provide paper writing services is resolutely resisted.
5. Responsibilities of reviewers
(1) Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
(2) Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper.
(3) Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
(4) Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
6. Editor's Responsibilities
(1) Editors submit manuscripts for review in a timely manner under the premise of double-blind review.
(2) Editors are responsible for ensuring that the review process is fair and reduces bias; Efforts should be made to ensure that the manuscripts received are peer-reviewed and published in a timely manner, and that papers reporting important findings should be published in a timely manner.
（3）Ensure that journals are published on time and on schedule; The content of the report is novel, truthful and reliable, and priority is given to publishing cutting-edge and hot research results.
(4) Do a good job in the detection of academic misconduct in the included manuscripts. Eliminate the publication of academic misconduct such as false, plagiarism, duplicate publication, third-party submission of manuscripts, and unreasonable signatures of manuscripts. Editors refer to the flowchart established by COPE (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines) to investigate possible academic misconduct and deal with it accordingly.
(5) A suitable and competent reviewer database should be established and maintained, the performance of reviewers/editorial board members should be objectively supervised, and the quality of their review should be recorded and whether the review tasks were completed on time.
(6) Timely feedback to authors on expert review; Support academic discussions and coordinate communication between authors and reviewers; Under the principle of "blind review", there is an obligation to keep reviewer information confidential; Disrespectful or defamatory comments will not be used.
(7) Editors have the right to reject and accept papers based on their importance, originality, clarity and relevance to the journal; Authors are allowed to appeal review decisions.
7. Retraction and correction
(1) Editors should consider retracting the manuscript in the following cases: there is clear evidence that the research results are unreliable due to improper behavior (such as data falsification) or honest errors (such as misjudgment or experimental error); the research results have been previously published In other places without proper cross-references, permissions, or justifications (ie duplicate publication); constitute plagiarism; report unethical research.
(2) The retraction notice should be linked to the retracted manuscript as much as possible (ie all electronic versions); clearly identify the retracted article (for example, include the title and author in the title of the retracted manuscript); publish in time to minimize misleading publication The harmful effects of materials.
(3) Editors should consider issuing corrections in the following cases: a small part of reliable publications proves to be misleading (especially because of honest errors); the list of authors/contributors is incorrect (ie, competent authors are omitted or not Those who meet the copyright conditions are listed). All submitted manuscripts will be screened by using AMLC system powered by CNKI, text copy ratio should be smaller than 10%.
ISSN: 1001-8166
Copyright © 2021 Advances in Earth Science
