Publication Ethics

The Journal of Nanomagnetism (JNM) is committed to the highest standards of publication ethics, adhering to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) principles and internationally accepted guidelines to ensure transparency and fairness. JNM enforces a strict zero‑tolerance policy toward unethical practices such as plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, duplicate publication, improper authorship claims, and manipulation of peer review. All manuscripts are evaluated according to COPE Core Practices, and all contributors are expected to comply with these ethical standards. 

The following sections outline JNM’s ethical and publishing policies, all interlinked for easier navigation and transparency throughout the editorial and publication process:

 
Authorship Criteria and Authors' Responsibilities
Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers
Duties and Responsibilities of Editors
Duties and Responsibilities of the Publisher
The Principles of Transparency
Journal Archiving Policy
Open Access Statement
Process for Identification of and Dealing with Allegations of Research Misconduct
Complaint and Appeal Policy and Procedure
Possible Misconducts
Generative AI Policy
COPE’s Guidelines & Flowcharts

1. Authorship Criteria and Authors' Responsibilities

I. Authorship and Contributorship

 To ensure authorship for the submitted manuscripts, the contributors should meet the following three conditions:

    • Substantial Contributions: To the conception, design, data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of the study.
    • Drafting and Revising: Drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content.
    • Final Approval: Final approval of the version to be published.
    • Accountability: Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work and to address questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the study.

Individuals who have contributed to the work but do not meet the authorship criteria must be acknowledged in the “Acknowledgements” section with their written consent. The Corresponding Author is responsible for ensuring the accuracy and completeness of the author list and must verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.

    • Authorship Change Request Form: In case of any changes in authorship (adding, removing, or reordering authors) during the revision stage, authors are required to submit a completed and signed Authorship Change Request Form, if applicable. All original and new authors must sign this form to confirm their agreement.

II. Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must submit original work that has not been previously published and is not under consideration elsewhere. All submissions are screened using iThenticate. Manuscripts with a similarity index above 30% or containing unethical overlap will be rejected.

Plagiarism, self-plagiarism, citation manipulation, and misappropriation of others’ work are considered serious ethical violations and are unacceptable.

III. Data Integrity and Reporting Standards

Authors must report research findings accurately and transparently. Manuscripts should include sufficient methodological detail to permit replication. Fabrication, falsification, or selective reporting of data is unacceptable.

IV. Data Access and Sharing

Authors may be requested to provide the raw data of their study along with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure the accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.

V. Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial or non-financial conflicts of interest that could be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be clearly stated (including the grant number or other reference number, if any).

VI. Multiple, Duplicate, Redundant, or Concurrent Submission/Publication

Manuscripts describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Therefore, authors should not submit a manuscript for consideration that has already been published elsewhere. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

VII. Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Assisted Technology

    • Disclosure: At submission, authors should disclose whether they used artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technologies (such as Large Language Models [LLMs], chatbots, or image creators) in the production of the submitted work. For example, if AI was used for writing assistance, this should be described in the Acknowledgements section.
    • AI Not an Author: Chatbots (such as ChatGPT) should not be listed as authors because they cannot take responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of the work, and these responsibilities are required for authorship.
    • Review and Editing: Authors should carefully review and edit the output generated by AI, as it can produce authoritative-sounding content that may be incorrect, incomplete, or biased.
    • No Citation as Author: Authors should not list AI and AI-assisted technologies as an author or co-author, nor cite AI as an author.
    • Plagiarism Assurance: Authors should be able to assert that there is no plagiarism in their paper, including in text and images produced by AI.

VIII. Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the article or provide evidence to the journal editors of its correctness.

2. Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

  1. Expertise and Suitability:
    • Agree to review only if you have the necessary expertise to assess the manuscript and can be unbiased in your assessment.
    • Provide journals with accurate and fair personal and professional information representing your expertise, including verifiable contact details.
    • Accept assignments only if you possess adequate expertise and can complete reviews within the agreed timeframe.
  1. Objectivity and Fairness:
    • Ensure reviews are objective, constructive, and free from personal bias related to the authors’ nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender, institutional affiliation, or other characteristics.
    • Base judgments on the quality and content of articles on professional and objective opinions.
    • Refrain from judging articles with conflicts of interest.
  1. Conflicts of Interest:
    • Immediately declare any potential conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript, so that alternative reviewers can be invited.
    • If you are currently employed at the same institution as any of the authors or have been recently (e.g., within the past 3 years), you should not agree to review.
    • If a competing interest exists that might prevent you from providing a fair and unbiased review, notify the journal and seek advice.
    • Report any such conflicts as soon as possible.
  1. Timeliness:
    • Respond to an invitation to peer

3. Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

  1. Publication Decisions and Fair Consideration:

    • Editors evaluate manuscripts based solely on scientific merit, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope, without discrimination (country, race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional affiliation).

    • All submitted manuscripts undergo peer-review by at least two expert reviewers.

    • The Editor-in-Chief, potentially in consultation with other editors or reviewers, makes the final decision to accept or reject manuscripts. This decision is based on the work’s validity, importance to researchers and readers, reviewer comments, and legal requirements (libel, copyright infringement, plagiarism).

    • Editorial decisions are not dictated by government policies or external agencies.

    • The editorial team has full authority to reject or accept a manuscript.

  1. Confidentiality:

    • Editors must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, including the identities of authors and reviewers.

    • Systems should be in place to ensure the confidentiality and protection from misuse of material submitted to the journal while under review.

    • Editors will take all reasonable steps to preserve the confidentiality of authors’ and reviewers’ identities.

    • The editorial team must maintain the confidentiality of the content of submitted articles until publication.

    • Information and content of articles should not be disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and, if necessary, other editorial staff.

  1. Conflicts of Interest:

    • Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where real or potential conflicts of interest exist (e.g., competitive, collaborative, financial relationships).

    • In such circumstances, another member of the editorial board will handle the manuscript.

    • Editors should disclose and try to avoid any conflict of interest.

  1. Ethical Oversight and Investigations:

    • Editors follow COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) flowcharts in investigating ethical concerns, including plagiarism and fraudulent data issues.

    • Editors will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised about a submitted manuscript or published paper.

    • Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior will be investigated, even if discovered years after publication.

    • When warranted, editors will publish corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, clarifications, or apologies.

4. Duties and Responsibilities of the Publisher

The publisher, Damghan University Press, is committed to:

    • The publisher must ensure that editorial decisions are final, based solely on professional judgment, and free from any commercial influence.

    • The publisher is responsible for monitoring the ethical conduct of the Editor‑in‑Chief, Associate Editors, Editorial Board Members, Reviewers, Authors, and Readers.

    • The publisher remains ready to publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions whenever necessary.

    • The publisher is committed to supporting editorial independence, ensuring long‑term digital preservation and accessibility of journal content, cooperating with editors in addressing ethical misconduct, and maintaining transparent and documented publication practices.

    • Publishers must maintain robust, clearly described, and publicly documented practices in accordance with all Core Practices.

    • In cases of alleged or confirmed scientific misconduct, plagiarism, or fraudulent publication, the publisher-together with the editors-will take appropriate measures, including issuing errata, clarifications, or retractions, and will work to prevent the publication of manuscripts involving research misconduct.

    • The publisher ensures permanent availability and preservation of scholarly content through partnerships and dedicated digital archiving.

    • The publisher financially supports the journal according to its annual ranking to cover infrastructure, operations, peer‑review processing, editing, publishing, record maintenance, and archiving.

5. The Principles of Transparency

  • Study design and ethical approval

Good research should be well-justified, well-planned, appropriately designed, and ethically approved. Conducting research to a lower standard may constitute misconduct. The authors are responsible for the scientific content and the accuracy of the bibliographic information.

  • Data analysis

Data should be appropriately analyzed, but inappropriate analysis does not necessarily amount to misconduct. Fabrication and falsification of data do constitute misconduct.

  • Data Availability

Data availability statements should describe how readers can access the data supporting the conclusions of the study and clearly outline the reasons why unavailable data cannot be released. The data used to support the findings of the study should be available from the corresponding author upon request.

  •  Human and animal studies

All manuscripts reporting the results of experimental investigations involving human subjects should include a statement confirming that informed consent was obtained from each subject or subject’s guardian. All animal or human studies should be used after the experimental protocol is approved by a local ethics committee.

  • Conflicts of interest

Conflicts of interest comprise those that may not be fully apparent and that may influence the judgment of the author, reviewers, and editors. They have been described as those that, when revealed later, would make a reasonable reader feel misled or deceived. They may be personal, commercial, political, academic, or financial. “Financial” interests may include employment, research funding, stock or share ownership, payment for lectures or travel, consultancies, and company support for staff.

  • Peer-review
    • This journal uses single-blind peer review.
    • Authors have the right to communicate to the editor if they do not wish their manuscript to be reviewed by a particular reviewer because of potential conflicts of interest.
    • No article is rejected unless negative comments are received from at least two reviewers.
    • This process, as well as any policies related to the journal’s peer review procedures, is clearly described on the journal’s website (Please see Peer review process).
6. Journal Archiving Policy
    • The plan for electronic backup and preservation of access to the journal's content is clearly indicated. This policy sets out the ways in which the authors of JNM can archive copies of their work on their own web pages, corporate web pages, and various other subject repositories. 
    • JNM is an open-access license. Articles can be made available immediately according to the terms of their specific Creative Commons license. If an author has published an article under an Open-Access license, JNM will encourage the author to share the Version of the Record upon publication rather than the Accepted Manuscript.
    • Authors may also reuse the Abstract and Citation information (e.g. Title, Author name, Publication dates) of their article anywhere at any time, including social media such as LinkedIn, Facebook, blogs and Twitter, providing that, where possible, a link is included back to the article on the JNM site. Preferably, the link should be, or include, the Digital Object Identifier (DOI), which can be found in the Citation information about the article online. The accepted version may be placed on: the author's personal website and/or the author's company/institutional repository or archive. Self-archiving of the submitted version is not subject to an embargo period.

 

  • Publishing schedule

JNM publishes 4 issues per year. All the content from the beginning to the end will be available forever on the journal's exclusive website (https://jnm.du.ac.ir/browse?_action=issue)

  • Privacy and Confidentiality
    • With the strictest consideration for the authors' confidentiality, all manuscripts must be reviewed.
    • While submitting manuscripts for review, authors entrust editors with the results of their creative and scientific labor, and their reputation and career may be on the line.
    • It may be a breach of the author's rights to disclose private information while the author's manuscript is being reviewed.
    • Editors must respect the reviewers' right to confidentiality.
    • Confidentiality may need to be broken if there is a suspicion of fraud or dishonesty, but it must be upheld otherwise.
    • Editors are not permitted to reveal information regarding manuscripts (including their reception, content, status during the reviewing process, reviewer critique, or eventual outcome) to anybody but the authors and reviewers.
    • Before the article is published, reviewers and editorial staff must respect the authors' rights by refraining from publicly criticizing or appropriating their work.
    • Reviewers should only be permitted to share the manuscript with others if the editor gives them permission. They should not be permitted to make copies of the document for their personal files. 
    • Copies of manuscripts that have been rejected shouldn't be kept by editors. 
    • Reviewer comments should not be published or otherwise made public without the author, editor, and reviewer's consent.
  • Revenue Sources/Advertising/Direct Marketing

JNM is financially supported by Damghan University Press and has no other sources for earning funds. 

7. Open Access Statement

Journal of JNM is a fully open-access journal, meaning all articles are available on the Web to all users immediately upon publication. JNM is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International (CC-BY 4.0). In this journal and under an open-access license, authors retain ownership of the copyright for their content but allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute, and/or copy the content as long as the original authors and source are cited properly.

   

  • Article Processing Charges (APCs)
    • No Cost for Authors: Explicit declaration of no submission charges and no publication fees for accepted articles.
    • Free Access for Readers: No charges from readers for downloading articles.
  • Copyright Statement

The author does not retain unrestricted copyrights and publishing rights in this journal. 

  • Advertising

The policy of the journal is not to have advertising.

  • Corrections and retractions

To maintain the integrity of academic records, journals may have to publish corrections or retract papers published in journals. According to agreed academic community norms, corrections of published articles are made by publishing an Erratum or Retraction article without altering the original article in any other way than by adding a prominent connection to the Erratum / Retraction article. The original article remains in the public domain and should be commonly indexed to the subsequent Erratum or Retraction. We may have to delete the material from our website and archive sites in the event the material is considered to infringe those rights or is defamatory. It may be necessary for the original author(s) to make minor corrections to published articles by commenting on the published article. It will only be acceptable if the modifications do not affect the article's results or conclusions.

    • Corrections: Changes to published articles that affect the article's meaning and conclusion but do not invalidate the article in its entirety may be corrected, at the discretion of the editor(s), by publishing an Erratum indexed and linked to the original article. Changes in authorship of published articles are corrected through an Erratum. Possibility of correction by the author during the review stage, and also new corrections after acceptance if approved by the editorial office.
    • Author Changes (Adding or Removing Authors):
      • Before Acceptance: Possible with a request from the corresponding author and signatures from all authors.
      • After Acceptance/Publication: Not possible.
    • Deceased Authors:
      • Before Acceptance: Name can be removed with the agreement of all authors and the editor’s approval, depending on the author’s contribution. If the corresponding author passes away, a new corresponding author must be chosen with everyone’s consent.
      • After Acceptance/Publication: Name removal is not possible, but the corresponding author can be changed. The deceased author’s name should be mentioned in the article’s footnote.
    • Retractions: On rare occasions, if the scientific information in an article is significantly compromised, it may be appropriate to retract published articles. In these cases, the Journal must comply with the COPE retraction guidelines. Retracted papers are indexed, and the original article is referred to.
      • Conditions for Retraction: Clear evidence of unreliable results (major error, data fabrication/falsification), plagiarism, duplicate publication without attribution, unauthorized use of material/data, copyright infringement or serious legal issues, unethical research, flawed or manipulated peer-review process, failure to disclose major conflicts of interest.
      • Retraction Procedure: Publishing a retraction notice in accordance with COPE guidelines, with the article remaining in the archive but clearly marked.

8. Process for Identification of and Dealing with Allegations of Research Misconduct

The editor-in-chief takes reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers containing research misconduct, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication.

  • The journal editor's first action is to inform the Editorial Office of JNM by supplying copies of the relevant material and a draft letter to the corresponding author asking for a nonjudgmental explanation.
  • If the author’s explanation is unacceptable and it seems that serious unethical conduct has taken place, the matter is referred to the Publication Committee via the Editorial Office.  After deliberation, the Committee will decide whether the case is sufficiently serious to warrant a ban on future submissions. 
  • If the infraction is less severe, the Editor, upon the advice of the Publication Committee, sends the author a letter of reprimand and reminds the author of JNM publication policies; if the manuscript has been published, the Editor may request the author to publish an apology in the journal to correct the record.
  • Notification will be sent to the corresponding author, and any work by the author responsible for the violation or any work these persons coauthored that is under review by JNM journal will be rejected immediately.
  • The authors are prohibited from serving on the JNM editorial board and as reviewers for this Journal.
  • JNM reserves the right to take more action.
  • In serious cases of fraud that result in the retraction of the article, a retraction notice will be published in the journal and will be linked to the article in the online version. The online version will also be marked “retracted” with the retraction date.

9. Complaint and Appeal Policy and Procedure

We support legitimate editor judgment challenges. However, you must provide strong backing or new data/information to answer the editors' and reviewers' concerns. Editors seldom reverse their initial decisions and don't count on many appeals. Hence, if your paper is rejected, you are strongly advised to submit it to another publication. Since they are based on the unbiased views of the reviewers, the Editorial Board's final decisions are often irrevocable and cannot be modified. But, if you disagree with the publication's decision and think you have a valid reason to appeal, follow these steps:

  • Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions by contacting the editor-in-chief, who will re-evaluate the manuscript, reviewer comments, and the final decision, possibly with the editorial board’s input. Complaints regarding staff, the editorial board, or the publisher can be submitted via email to jnm@du.ac.ir, with all complaints acknowledged within three working days.
  • Describe your valid concerns and the reasons you disagree with the decision.
  • Any additional material or data that you would like considered throughout the review process should be provided to the journal's editors.
  • If you think the reviewers misjudged your manuscript, explain why and provide the necessary supporting evidence.
  • If you believe there was a conflict of interest throughout the arbitration process, provide evidence.
  • The editors only take into account one appeal for each article. After receiving the appeal, the editors may speak with the referees and editors who read the piece.
  • The editors' and editorial board's decisions on appeals are final, and they may involve rejecting the article, seeking more peer review, or requiring submission of a revised version of the manuscript.

10. Possible Misconduct

  • Plagiarism
    • Plagiarism is intentionally using someone else’s ideas or other original material as one's own. Copying even one sentence from someone else’s manuscript, or even one of your own that has previously been published, without proper citation, is considered plagiarism by JNM Journal. All manuscripts under review or published with JNM are subject to screening using plagiarism detection software (iThenticate).
    • Thus, plagiarism is a serious violation of publication ethics. The authors are expected to check their manuscripts for plagiarism before submission.
    • At first step, the manuscript is inspected for plagiarism, and depending on the similarity check software report by iThenticate, the manuscript is either progressed into the review phase or rejected due to similarities. The acceptable similarity percentage is less than 30%.
    • If plagiarism is detected during peer review, the submission can be rejected. If plagiarism is detected after publication, we reserve the right, as necessary, to issue a correction or retract the article. We reserve the right to notify the institutions of authors about the plagiarism that was found before or after publication.
  • Data Fabrication and Falsification

Data fabrication and falsification mean the researcher did not really carry out the study but made-up data or results and recorded or reported the fabricated information. Data falsification means the researcher did the experiment but manipulated, changed, or omitted data or results from the research findings.

  • Duplicate Publication

Duplicate publication occurs when two or more papers, without full cross-referencing, share essentially the same hypotheses, data, discussion points, and conclusions. 

  • Citation Manipulation

Excessive citations in a submitted manuscript that did not contribute to the scholarly content of the article and were included solely to increase citations to a given author's work or articles published in a particular journal are referred to as citation manipulation. This constitutes a form of scientific misconduct, as it misrepresents the significance of the specific work and publication in which it appears.

  • Simultaneous Submission:

Simultaneous submission occurs when a manuscript (or substantial sections from a manuscript) is submitted to a journal while another journal is already considering it.

  • Redundant Publications:

Redundant publications involve the inappropriate division of study outcomes into several articles, often in response to the desire to fill a curriculum vitae.

  • Improper Author Contribution or Attribution: 

All listed authors must have made a significant scientific contribution to the research in the manuscript and approved all its claims. Don’t forget to list everyone who made a significant scientific contribution, including students and laboratory technicians.

11. Generative AI Policy (JNM)

At JNM, we are committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity and publication ethics in the use of emerging technologies, including Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Large Language Models (LLMs). This policy, aligned with the guidelines of COPE and global editorial best practices, defines acceptable and prohibited uses of these tools by authors, reviewers, and editors.

  • Use of AI by Authors
    • Authors may employ AI-based tools exclusively for linguistic purposes—such as grammar correction, style improvement, and clarity enhancement.
    • AI tools must not be used to create new scientific content, perform data analysis, generate results or conclusions, or produce citations and references.
    • Authors retain full accountability for the accuracy and integrity of any AI-assisted output.
    • Any application of AI must be clearly disclosed in the Acknowledgments section, specifying the tool’s name and its purpose of use.

Example of Disclosure:

“The authors used [Tool Name] for language editing and clarity enhancement. All scientific interpretations, analyses, and conclusions were independently produced and verified by the authors.”

    • AI Use in Figures and Visual Content
      • AI-generated or AI-altered images, figures, charts, or graphical abstracts are not permitted.
      • Exceptions apply only when AI is an explicit component of the research design or methodology, and full methodological details are provided in the Methods section.
      • Acceptable image modifications are limited to basic visual adjustments (brightness, contrast, color correction) that do not distort or misrepresent the original data.
    • Reviewer Responsibilities
      • Reviewers must not rely on AI tools to read, summarize, or evaluate manuscripts.
      • Uploading confidential material into AI systems constitutes a serious ethical breach.
      • All peer review reports must be based solely on the reviewer’s own scholarly assessment.
    • Editorial Responsibilities
      • Editors are prohibited from using AI for manuscript evaluation, decision writing, or correspondence with authors.
      • Editorial decisions must arise from human academic judgment and peer feedback.
      • AI tools may only assist in non-confidential technical processes such as formatting checks, without accessing manuscript content.
    • Policy Enforcement

Non-compliance with this policy may lead to one or more of the following actions:

      • Rejection of the submission or retraction of the published article.
      • Removal or suspension of editorial or reviewer roles.
      • Notification of the author’s or reviewer’s institutional authorities.

More References for Ethical Guidance:

 

12. COPE’s Guidelines & Flowcharts  

JNM is committed to following and applying the guidelines and flowcharts of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in its reviewing and publishing process and issues. For more information on COPE’s Guidelines & Flowcharts, please see: (https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts-new/translations). 

 

COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practices for Editors

(https://publicationethics.org/files/2008%20Code%20of%20Conduct.pdf)

Everything published in the journal is the responsibility of the editor-in-chief. This means that the editors must:

    • Strive to meet the needs of readers and authors;
    • Strive to improve their journal constantly.
    • Have processes in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish.
    • Champion freedom of expression;
    • Maintain the integrity of the academic record;
    • Preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards;
    • Always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.
    • Best Practices for Editors would include:
    • Actively seek the views of authors, readers, reviewers, and editorial board members about ways of improving their journal’s processes.
    • Encouraging and being aware of research into peer review and publishing, and reassessing their journal’s processes in the light of new findings.
    • Supporting initiatives designed to reduce research and publication misconduct.
    • Supporting initiatives to educate researchers about publication ethics.
    • Assessing the effects of their journal policies on author and reviewer behavior and revising policies, as required, to encourage responsible behavior and discourage misconduct.
    • Ensuring that all published reports and reviews of research, including statistical reviews, have been reviewed by suitably qualified reviewers
    • Ensure that appropriate reviewers are selected for submissions (i.e., individuals who can judge the work and are free from disqualifying competing interests).
    • Following the COPE flowchart in cases of suspected reviewer misconduct.

Ownership and Management

Publisher and Proprietor: Damghan University Press