Publication Ethics

MindCare Journal of Education, Counseling, and Psychology is committed to upholding ethical standards of publication at every stage of the publishing process. We ensure that all parties — authors, editors, reviewers, and publishers — act in accordance with the principles of scientific integrity. We strictly reject any form of ethical violation, including plagiarism and data manipulation, to maintain the credibility and quality of the scientific work we publish.

 

Section A: Publication and authorship

  1. All submitted papers are subject to a rigorous peer review process by at least two international reviewers who are experts in the field of the particular paper.
  2. The review process is a blind peer review.
  3. Factors considered in the review are relevance, feasibility, significance, originality, readability, and language.
  4. Possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revision, or rejection.
  5. If the author is encouraged to revise and resubmit the manuscript, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
  6. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
  7. Acceptance of papers is restricted by applicable legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
  8. No research may be included in more than one publication.

 

Section B: Author responsibilities

  1. Authors must declare that their manuscripts are original works.
  2. Authors must declare that their manuscripts have not been published elsewhere.
  3. Authors must declare that their manuscripts are not currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.
  4. Authors must participate in the peer review process.
  5. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of errors.
  6. All Authors named in the paper must have made a significant contribution to the research.
  7. Authors must declare that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
  8. Authors must inform the Editor of any conflicts of interest.
  9. Authors must identify all sources used in the preparation of their manuscript.
  10. Authors must report any errors they discover in their published work to the Editor.

 

Section C: Reviewer responsibilities

  1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat it as privileged information.
  2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, without personal criticism of the author.
  3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
  5. Reviewers should also notify the Editor-in-Chief of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  6. Reviewers should not review 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.

 

Section D: Editorial responsibilities

  1. The editor has sole responsibility and authority to reject/accept a manuscript.
  2. The editor is responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication.
  3. The editor should always consider the needs of the authors and readers when striving to improve the publication.
  4. The editor should ensure the quality of the paper and the integrity of the academic record.
  5. Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when necessary.
  6. Editors should have a clear picture of the funding sources of the research.
  7. Editors should base their decisions only on the importance, originality, clarity and relevance of the paper to the scope of the publication.
  8. Editors should not reverse their decisions or overturn previous editors' decisions without serious reason.
  9. Editors should maintain the anonymity of reviewers.
  10. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
  11. Editors should only accept a paper if they are confident that it is correct.
  12. Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether the paper is published or unpublished, and make every reasonable effort to seek a resolution.
  13. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicion; they should have evidence of misconduct.
  14. Editors should not tolerate conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members.