Publication Ethics

The Quarterly Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Environment (JSAE), with respect to the rules of ethics in publications, is subject to the rules of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and follows the executive regulations of the Law on Prevention and Combating Fraud in Scientific Works.

Introduction

Considering the Islamic Azad University's approach to the production, dissemination, and updating of intercultural sciences, as well as adherence to national and international guidelines on research ethics, such as the International Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Guide and the Charter and "Research Ethics Standards" approved by the Deputy Minister of Research and Technology of the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology, scientific-research journals of the Islamic Azad University, as a member of scientific-research journals of the Islamic Republic of Iran, are required to adhere to the principles of professional ethics. In this regard, the most important responsibilities of the people involved in publishing the magazine, such as author (s), managing director, editor, editorial board members, and internal manager (head of the publication office) are briefly stated.

Ethics approval

When reporting a study that involved human participants, their data or biological material, authors should include a statement that confirms that the study was approved (or granted exemption) by the appropriate institutional and/or national research ethics committee (including the name of the ethics committee) and certify that the study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration or comparable standards, the authors must explain the reasons for their approach, and demonstrate that an independent ethics committee or institutional review board explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. If a study was granted exemption from requiring ethics approval, this should also be detailed in the manuscript (including the reasons for the exemption). Manuscripts with suspected ethical problems will be investigated according to COPE Guidelines (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts).

The ethics approval section is included at the end of the extended abstract of the journal articles in English and also at the end of the articles in Persian. Also, the authors are required to declare in the methods section whether the participants provided informed consent and whether the consent was written or verbal.

Which type of manuscripts does not need ethical approval code?
Studies involving information freely available in the public domain (e.g. published biographies, newspaper accounts), review articles, case reports, letter or editorial.

Authors ’responsibilities

1. You as the author are responsible for ensuring that you have the appropriate consent for any third-party media that forms part of your submitted work. Where this is media that identifies living people, every effort must be taken to preserve privacy. This may involve redaction of unnecessary information which identifies a living person. It is the author’s responsibility to ensure they have the right consent from the person who has participated in the research - both the consent to have the media (be that photo, video, voice recording etc) and also the consent to publish it with a commercial publisher. You must have both types of consent - a person may have agreed to be videoed for “research purposes” but not for that video to be shared. If you are publishing Open Access, it is important that you also have consent to the media being published in an Open Access publication.
2. From the articles submitted to the journals of Islamic Azad University, an article is selected and published that has not been previously published in other scientific journals (Persian or other languages), is the result of original research, and has an accurate source and citation. 
3. The ultimate responsibility for the full content of the submitted article lies with the author. It is worthwhile to report the findings of the article in full and to be very careful in presenting the findings and interpreting and analyzing them. The article should contain sufficient details and resources so that other researchers can access the same data set to repeat the research. 
4. Before submitting an article, any potential conflicts of interest that affect the outcome or interpretation of the research findings or the selection of editors and judges should be raised, and the research sponsor should be mentioned in the article.
5. Respect the confidential evaluation process and prevent any disclosure of the author's identity to the judges and vice versa. In other words, the article is free of any information subject to self-disclosure, so the referee will not be able to identify the author.
6. Ensuring the existence of the name, information, and role of each of the authors (responsible author and co-author (s)) and the absence of names other than the researchers involved in conducting the research.
7. Protecting the privacy, human dignity, well-being, and freedom of the participants in the research and mentioning any danger that is posed to humans or other creatures through the research.
8. Whenever the author notices any error or carelessness in his article, he informs the publication about it, takes action to correct it, or withdraws the article.
9. Explicit statement of the author (s) about the authenticity of the article, lack of plagiarism, and printing in other publications
10. Examples of publishing and researching immoral behavior:
    
    1. Fabrication: Reporting unrealistic material and presenting fictitious data or results as laboratory results, experimental studies, or personal findings. Unrealistically recording what did not happen or shifting the results of various studies.
    2. Falsification: recording and presenting research results in such a way that the details of the research or data collection process are manipulated, data is deleted or altered, or some small results are obscured in order to obscure larger facts (Juicy). Quotes) until the results of the research reach specific goals or the results presented are not in doubt.
    3. Plagiarism: A close adaptation of the thoughts and expressions of other authors, copying in the expression of ideas, structural similarities in the text or attributing ideas and results of others without proper reference, or introducing it as genuine scientific research.
    4. Scientific lease: Hiring another person to do research by the author (s) and entering and occupying shortly after the completion of the research and publishing it in his own name.
    5. Unrealistic attribution: Unrealistic attribution of the author (ies) to an institution, center, educational or research group that did not play a role in the original research.
    6. Duplicate submission: An article or part of it that has been published in another journal (inside or outside the country) or is in the process of being judged and published.
    7. Overlapping publication: printing the data and findings of your previous articles with a slight change to another article with a new title.

Director Responsibilities

1. Pursue free access to information in the publication and expand its publication and dissemination
2. Supervise and follow up on the work of the editorial board and editor of the publication
3. Do not interfere in the process of scientific judging of articles
4. Do not interfere in the scientific decisions of the editorial board and editor of the journal
5. Respect the material and intellectual rights of authors, editors, editorial boards, judges, and executives
6. Final approval of the content submitted to the publication for legal publication

Editorial Board Responsibilities

1. Maintaining the freedom and authority of the editor of the journal in performing his duties independently, such as rejecting or accepting manuscripts received with the help of the editorial board and observing issues related to the scientific competencies of the article, including preserving material and intellectual rights, originality of research and opinions of judges and editors.
2. Efforts to promote and implement the rules and guidelines of research ethics and health
3. Receive documents related to the following conditions in accepting the article from the author (s):
   
   1. Granting the right to publish an article in a university journal
   2. Declare a conflict of interest
4. Selection of suitable judges according to the specialized field, scientific and work experience, as well as respecting the reasoned and logical requests of the author (s) regarding the arbitration of the article by special judges
5. Avoid disclosing information and details of the author (s) and referees in the article evaluation process, and avoid presenting article information and discussing its details with others.
6. Avoid any conflict of interest in the arbitration process, which could potentially affect the acceptance and publication of the submitted articles.
7. Careful examination of the works of the accused of research violations received from the judges or other means, and if necessary, action based on the "Instructions for Research Violations"
8. Stages of dealing with publishing and researching immoral behavior:
   
   1. Inform the editorial board of the publication and send a letter to the responsible author to request an explanation, without judgment.
   2. Allocate a suitable opportunity for the author (s) accused of "publishing and researching immoral behavior" to respond and follow up on cases and violations until the last stage
   3. Referral of the subject to the editorial board in case of receiving unacceptable explanations from the author for the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of the article
   4. In accordance with the final decision of the editorial board;
      
      1. A written warning to the author of the article and a reminder of the publication policy before publication, or a request to amend the report and publish the text of the author's apology in the next issue
      2. Warn the responsible author and reject any other work by the offending author
      3. Publish an apology statement in the next issue of the print edition of the publication and mention it in the online version of the article in which fraud and plagiarism have been proven (Retraction).
      4. Efforts to continuously improve the quality and guarantee the integrity and honesty of the content of the publication and respect for the organization of the publication, including (readers, writers, licensed judges, managing director, internal manager, editorial staff, and publisher)
      5. Review all received articles in due time

Reviewers ’responsibility

1. Contribute to the qualitative, content, and scientific review of articles in order to improve and enhance the quality of the journal.
2. Applying professional knowledge and expertise in the subject area of ​​the article and announcing the decision not to accept the article to the editor of the journal in case of conflicts of interest, including common, financial, organizational, personal, or lack of time to judge.
3. Announcing the expert opinion in a clear and unambiguous manner, based on scientific documents and sufficient reasoning within a certain period of time to the editor of the journal and the author (s) and refraining from applying tasteful, guild, racial, and religious opinions in judging the article.
4. Avoid using the information, discussions, interpretations, and ideas obtained in the process of judging the article or unpublished information of the author (s), for personal gain.
5. Respect the confidential evaluation process and refrain from using information, discussions, interpretations, and ideas obtained in the judging process or using new data and concepts of the article for or against one's own or others' research or to criticize or discredit the author (s).
6. Assisting the editor of the journal in preparing a report on "Unethical Publishing and Research Behavior" of articles received for judging.
7. Notify the editor of the journal when there is a delay in judging the article and request more time or select another referee.

Responsibility of the Office of Scientific-Research Journals

1. Clearly define and publish their publishing policies, especially in relation to editorial board decision-making independence, publishing ethics, intellectual property and copyright protection, conflicts of interest, the duties of authors, judges, editors, and editorial staff, the judging process, and Decision-making, appeals, and complaints, preservation of scientific documents of the decision-making process, preservation of information of authors and judges, correction or deletion of accepted articles, and resolution of disputes between plaintiffs and defendants for "publishing and research immoral behavior"
2. Monitoring and following up on complaints of research violations for university publications.
3. Contribution to the originality and health of research articles published in university journals.