Publication Ethics

Author’s Publication Ethics

New Carbon Materials is committed to upholding the integrity of the scientific record.

Authors should refrain from misrepresenting research results which could damage the trust in the journal and ultimately the entire scientific endeavor. Maintaining integrity of the research and its presentation can be achieved by following the rules of good scientific practice, which includes:

  • The manuscript has not been submitted to more than one journal for simultaneous consideration.
  • The manuscript has not been published previously (partly or in full), unless the new work concerns an expansion of previous work (please provide transparency on the re-use of material to avoid the hint of text-recycling (“self-plagiarism”)).
  • A single study is not split up into several parts to increase the quantity of submissions and submitted to various journals or to one journal over time (e.g., “salami-publishing”).
  • No data have been fabricated or manipulated (including images) to support your conclusions.
  • No data, text, or theories by others are presented as if they were the authors’ own (“plagiarism”). Proper acknowledgements to other works must be given (this includes material that is closely copied (near verbatim), summarized and/or paraphrased), quotation marks are used for verbatim copying of material, and permissions are secured for material that is copyrighted.

Important note: the journal may use software to screen for plagiarism.

  • Consent to submit has been received from all co-authors before the work is submitted and the corresponding author is responsible for having ensured that this agreement has been reached.
  • Authors whose names appear on the submission have contributed sufficiently to the scientific work and therefore share collective responsibility and accountability for the results.

 

Publication Ethics of External Reviewers

  1. External reviewers should adhere to the principles of fairness, impartiality, confidentiality and timeliness to make responsible review opinions on the manuscript. There shall be no prejudice or discrimination against the author’s scientific research institution, region, qualifications, ethnicity, etc., the author’s research content shall not be disclosed, and the author’s research results and ideas shall not be plagiarized or embezzled.
  2. When the external reviewer has interests with the author (such as kinship, teacher-student relationship, competition relationship, etc.), in order to ensure the fairness of the manuscript review, the relevant situation should be declared to the editorial department in a timely manner and recused.
  3. If the external reviewer finds suspected academic misconduct in the manuscript review, he or she should inform the editorial department of the journal in time to avoid the publication of the academic misconduct.

 

Publication Ethics for Editorial Staff

  1. Editors should handle manuscripts fairly, justly and in a timely manner, and make decisions on accepting or rejecting manuscripts based on their academic, innovative, readable, and relevance to the journal’s reporting direction.
  2. Editors shall abide by the principle of confidentiality. On the one hand, it is necessary to strictly keep the reviewer’s information to ensure that the identity of the reviewer and other relevant personnel in the editorial department is protected during the review process. On the other hand, the author’s research content should be kept confidential, and the author’s research results and ideas should not be plagiarized, misappropriated, or any information about the manuscript should be disclosed to others.
  3. Editors shall not be driven by interests to interfere with peer review, and shall strive to ensure the independent review of external reviewers to ensure the fairness and impartiality of peer review.
  4. The editors should decide whether to use the recommended external reviewers based on whether the external reviewers recommended by the authors have interests with the authors. If an author requests to recuse himself or herself from an external reviewer to review his manuscript and this request is reasonable, the editors should accede to it.
  5. Editors should respect the author’s views and writing style, and obtain the author’s consent for key changes to the paper involving academic views.
  6. The editors shall ensure the authenticity of the records of the review process, and have the obligation to keep the materials in each link of the review and revision confidential.
  7. Editors must take effective response to and investigate suspected academic misconduct complaints in submitted manuscripts or published manuscripts, and promptly publish the results of corrections, clarifications, retractions, etc. The procedures for the investigation and handling of academic misconduct manuscripts shall be carried out in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Rules for the Investigation and Handling of Scientific Research Integrity Cases (for Trial Implementation), and the handling decision shall be submitted to the Academic Committee of the Institute for deliberation and report to the Executive Committee of the Institute.