For Authors:

1. Reporting Standards: Authors should present accurate reports of original research conducted and provide objective discussions about its significance. Researchers should display their findings honestly and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to enable others to replicate the research. Misconduct or intentionally presenting inaccurate data is unethical and unacceptable behavior. Manuscripts should follow journal submission guidelines.
2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they write entirely original work. Manuscripts should not be simultaneously submitted to more than one publisher unless the editor has agreed to co-publication. Relevant prior works and publications, both by other researchers and the authors themselves, must be acknowledged and cited properly. Primary literature should be cited whenever possible. Directly quoted words taken from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks following standard citation practices.
3. Duplicate, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication: Generally, authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable behavior. Multiple publications stemming from a single research project should be clearly identified, and the primary publication should be referenced. Source Acknowledgment: Authors should acknowledge all data sources used in the research by citing them. Proper acknowledgment of others' work should always be done.
4. Authorship of the Paper: Authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals' contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
5. Authors also ensure that all listed authors have seen and approved the submitted manuscript and their inclusion as co-authors.
6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should clearly disclose any financial or substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All financial support sources for the project should be disclosed.
7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in the submitted manuscript, they should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the manuscript.

For Editors:
1. Publication Decisions: Based on the reviewer's reports, editors may accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of questionable works and their importance to researchers and readers should always guide such decisions. Editors may be guided by journal editorial policies and constrained by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult with other editors or reviewers in making these decisions. The editorial board should be responsible for all they publish and must have procedures and policies to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of published articles.
2. Manuscript Review: Editors should ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by an editor for its originality and suitability for the journal's scope. Editors should ensure the peer review process is fair and wise. Editors should explain the peer review process to authors through information. Editors should select appropriate peer reviewers for manuscripts considered for publication by selecting individuals with adequate and relevant expertise and endeavor to avoid conflicts of interest.
3. Fair Play: Editors should ensure that each manuscript submitted to the journal is reviewed on its intellectual content without regard to gender, race, religion, nationality, etc., of the authors.
4. Confidentiality: Editors should ensure that information regarding submitted manuscripts by authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and author confidentiality.
5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Journal editors shall not use unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts for their own research without the written consent of the author. Editors shall not be involved in decisions about manuscripts where they have a conflict of interest.

For Reviewers:
1. Confidentiality: Information regarding submitted manuscripts by authors should be kept confidential. They should not be shown or discussed with others except as permitted by the editor.
2. Source Acknowledgment: Reviewers should ensure that authors have acknowledged all data sources used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work cited by the authors. Reviewers should promptly notify the editor if they discover any deviations, potential ethical publication violations, substantial similarities between the manuscript and simultaneous submissions to other journals or published articles, or suspect that errors may have occurred during the research or writing and submission of the manuscript.
3. Objectivity Standards: Reviews of submitted manuscripts should be conducted objectively, and reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should follow journal guidelines on the specific feedback required from them, unless there are argumentative reasons not to do so. Reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help authors improve their manuscripts. Reviewers should clarify suggested additional studies that are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration.
4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
5. Timeliness: Reviewers should respond within a reasonable time frame according to the established policy. Reviewers should only agree to review a manuscript if they are reasonably confident they can return the review within the proposed or agreed-upon time frame and inform the journal promptly if they need an extension. In cases where a reviewer feels it is not possible for them to complete the review of a manuscript within the stipulated time frame, they should communicate with the editor so that the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.