The journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of academic integrity and originality. All submitted manuscripts must represent original work and must not contain plagiarized content, in whole or in part. Submitted manuscripts are subject to editorial assessment of originality, including the evaluation of textual or content similarity with previously published sources. Similarity alone does not constitute plagiarism and is assessed in context by the editorial team.
Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to, the direct copying of text, ideas, data, images, or figures from other sources without appropriate attribution. This also includes mosaic or patchwork plagiarism, where text or ideas are rephrased or rearranged from existing sources without proper citation. Editorial evaluation of potential plagiarism considers the nature, extent, and location of overlapping content, as well as whether the material is appropriately cited and justified within the scholarly context.
Self-Plagiarism and Redundant Publication
Authors should avoid self-plagiarism and redundant publication. Submissions must not substantially overlap with previously published work by the same authors, unless such overlap is clearly justified, appropriately cited, and necessary for the scholarly context of the study.
Limited reuse of standard methodological descriptions or background information may be acceptable, provided that the original sources are properly cited and that such reuse does not constitute a substantial portion of the manuscript or misrepresent the novelty of the work.
Any reuse of text, data, figures, or methods from an author’s own prior publications must be transparently disclosed and referenced at the time of submission. The submission of multiple manuscripts reporting substantially similar data, analyses, or conclusions, without clear justification, may be considered redundant publication and is subject to editorial assessment.
Salami Slicing and Fragmented Publication
Authors should avoid the inappropriate fragmentation of research findings across multiple publications, commonly referred to as salami slicing. The division of a single study, dataset, or research project into several manuscripts is considered unacceptable when it results in substantial overlap, repetition of data or analyses, or when each publication does not make a distinct and meaningful scholarly contribution.
When multiple publications arise from a larger research project, authors must clearly justify the scientific rationale for separate manuscripts, ensure that each submission addresses a distinct research question, and provide transparent cross-referencing to related publications. The editorial team will assess such cases contextually to determine whether the submissions represent legitimate, independent contributions or constitute redundant or fragmented publication.
Acceptable Reuse and Citation
The appropriate use of previously published material is permitted when it is clearly cited and complies with accepted scholarly standards. Limited reuse of standard methodological descriptions or widely accepted procedures may be acceptable, provided that the original sources are properly acknowledged and that the reused content does not constitute a substantial portion of the manuscript or misrepresent the novelty of the work.
The reuse of previously published figures, tables, images, or other materials is permitted only where appropriate attribution is provided and where such reuse complies with applicable copyright requirements and permissions. Authors are responsible for obtaining any necessary permissions prior to submission.
Excessive reuse of previously published material, even when properly cited, may be considered inappropriate if it undermines the originality of the manuscript or its contribution to the scholarly literature. The acceptability of reused material is assessed by the editorial team in context, taking into account its extent, purpose, and presentation.
Similarity Checks and Editorial Assessment
All submissions are subject to similarity checks as part of the editorial screening process. Similarity reports are evaluated by the editorial team in context, taking into account the nature, location, and extent of overlapping content. A similarity score alone does not determine whether plagiarism has occurred.
Where elevated levels of similarity are identified during editorial screening or peer review, authors may be informed of the results and, where appropriate, provided with a similarity report to support clarification or revision. In such cases, authors may be asked to address overlapping content before further editorial consideration.
In instances where minor similarity issues are identified that do not affect the scientific content or originality of the work, authors may be informed at later stages of the publication process, such as during revision or proofreading, to allow for minor corrections or improvements in attribution.
The provision of similarity reports and the timing of any requested revisions remain at the discretion of the editorial team and are guided by the nature and significance of the identified overlap.
Handling of Plagiarism Concerns
Suspected cases of plagiarism or inappropriate overlap may be identified during editorial screening, peer review, or following publication, and may be reported by editors, reviewers, authors, or readers. All reported concerns are subject to editorial assessment to determine their nature, extent, and potential impact on the originality and integrity of the work.
Where concerns are identified before publication, the editorial team may request clarification, revision, or additional attribution from the authors. Depending on the severity and context of the issue, the manuscript may proceed following revision or may be rejected.
Where plagiarism or inappropriate overlap is identified after publication, the journal may take appropriate editorial action to correct the scholarly record. Such actions may include the publication of a correction, an expression of concern, or the retraction of the article, in accordance with established ethical and editorial guidelines.
Throughout this process, authors are expected to fully cooperate with the editorial office and provide timely responses, explanations, or documentation as requested. Editorial decisions are based on contextual evaluation and proportional response, taking into account whether issues arise from honest error or represent more serious concerns regarding originality or attribution.
AI and Generative Tools Policy
The use of artificial intelligence (AI)–based tools, including generative language or image tools, is increasingly common in the preparation of scholarly manuscripts. The journal recognizes that such tools may be used as supportive aids in the research and writing process; however, their use must be transparent, responsible, and consistent with standards of academic integrity.
AI-based tools may be used to assist with language editing, grammar correction, readability, or the organization of content. They must not be listed as authors and cannot take responsibility for the originality, accuracy, or integrity of the work. All authors remain fully responsible for the content of the manuscript, including the accuracy of the data, the validity of the analyses, and the appropriateness of citations.
The use of AI or generative tools to create, alter, or fabricate research data, results, analyses, or scientific conclusions is not acceptable. Any content generated or assisted by AI must be carefully reviewed, verified, and edited by the authors to ensure that it is accurate, original, and properly attributed.
Where the use of AI or generative tools has made a significant contribution to the preparation of the manuscript, authors should disclose this use in an appropriate section of the manuscript (e.g., Acknowledgments or Methods), in a transparent and concise manner.
The editorial team may consider the use of AI-assisted tools as part of its assessment of originality, authorship, and integrity. Any concerns related to undisclosed or inappropriate use of AI tools will be handled in accordance with the journal’s editorial and ethical policies.
Image Manipulation Policy
Images submitted as part of a manuscript are considered an integral component of the scientific data and must accurately represent the original observations. Authors are responsible for ensuring that all images are prepared and presented in a manner that preserves the integrity of the underlying data.
Only minimal and appropriate image adjustments are permitted. These may include global adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance, as well as resizing or cropping for clarity and presentation purposes. Such adjustments must be applied uniformly across the entire image and must not obscure, eliminate, or misrepresent any relevant features.
The selective enhancement, removal, repositioning, or addition of elements within an image is not acceptable. The manipulation of images that alters their scientific meaning, exaggerates findings, or conceals relevant information constitutes inappropriate image manipulation.
The assembly of composite images is permitted only where it is clearly indicated and appropriately described in the figure legend. All individual components of composite images must be clearly delineated, and their origin must be transparent.
Authors must retain the original, unprocessed image files and be prepared to provide them upon reasonable request by editors or reviewers during peer review or post-publication assessment. Any image processing performed should be described in the Methods section or figure legends, where applicable.
Concerns related to image manipulation identified before or after publication will be handled in accordance with the journal’s editorial and ethical policies, including the procedures for corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions where appropriate.