Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement
Egyptian Journal of Archaeological and Restoration Studies (EJARS) is under academic supervi-sion of Sohag University. We maintain high-quality standards through a very strict peer-review process. This process is subjected to strict ethical policies and professional codes. The editorial office elects experts from different fields of study relevant to the submitted papers who have original and innovative contributions. Through this process, we make sure the best papers are selected for publication. Taking into consideration the violation of these professional guidelines.
All the submitted articles are screened for plagiarism using the latest available specialized software to ensure originality and meeting plagiarism standards. Thus, the authors should ensure that they write and submit only entirely original and/or appropriately cited works. Our system ensures that all data and experiments are not manipulated. All papers that do not meet such standards are rejected.
The editorial office requires that all submitted articles are not considered for publication elsewhere. Duplicate submissions are rejected. We require authors to clarify their contributions in the submitted articles. Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the article as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content. The corresponding author should ensure that no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list and verify that all co-authors have seen, approved, and agreed to submit the final version of the article for publication.
Furthermore, the corresponding author should ensure that all persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript, such as (technical help, writing, and language editing) must be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements Section". Authors must disclose any conflict of interest and acknowledge all funding parties.
As an author, you retain rights for a large number of author uses, including use by your employing institute or company. These rights are retained and permitted without the need to obtain specific permission from the journal and/or editor. These include the right to (1) read, download, copy, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles (2); present the journal article at a meeting or conference (3); include the journal article, in full or in part, in theses and dissertations. The journal editorial office does not encourage the author to cite the papers for the sake of increasing the citation within the submission time for avoiding the reject of the article.
Authors are obliged to fully cooperate in the review process by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, and copyright permissions. In addition, they should respond to the reviewers’ comments point-by-point in adequate time, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given. All authors should have significantly contributed to the research. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes. Article Publication Charge (APC) will be applied according to the articles’ fees available on the journal website.
Editor-in-Chief, mangaing editor, editors, and editorial staff will not disclose any information about the submitted material to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher. Editors and editorial board members will not use published/unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (originality, importance, validity, clarity, and relevancy to the journal’s scope) regardless of the authors’ citizenship, religion & belief, gender, ethnic origin, or institutional affiliation.
Only, the decisions of editing and publishing of the articles are determined by the journal itself, not by any policies of governments or any other agencies. The Journal Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content. Editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts considered for publication undergo blind peer-review by at least two reviewers who are experts in the field relevant to the evaluated articles.
The publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief depending on a set of criteria that include (but not limited to) relevance to the journal research topics, originality of the topic, reviewers’ comments, technical quality, significance for the field, style and overall representation, and overall rating of the article (1:10).(Review form)
Editors should not withdraw their decisions nor reversethose of previous editors without rational reasons. When the editor rejects a manuscript, the rejection should not be based on suspicions. When making a publication decision, the editor may consult with the associate editor, other members of the editorial team, and reviewers. Editors should withdraw when they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscript.
Editors should strive to maintain the integrity of the academic record, to constantly improve the journal, and to meet the needs of readers and authors. Reviewers should point out in their reviews relevant published work which has not yet been cited in the reviewed material. Editors should be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, apologies and retractions when needed.
Reviewers who have accepted a manuscript for evaluation are expected to submit their reviews within five weeks. Reviewers should withdraw whenthey have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscript.
Reviewers should conduct their reviews objectively with no personal criticism of the author(s). Reviewers should express their reviews clearly with supporting arguments and provide constructive feedback to the author(s). All privileged information and ideas expressed in the manuscript should be kept confidential by the reviewers.
Reviewers should keep all information regarding the manuscript confidential and treat them as privileged information. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Reviewers must know and keep in mind the Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.