Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Granthaalayah Publications and its editors are fully committed to ethical publication practice, transparency and research integrity. We follow the principles and core practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and recognised international standards for research involving humans and animals.

Section A: Publication and authorship

All submitted papers are subject to a strict peer-review process by at least two reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular article.
The review process is a blind peer review.
The factors that are taken into account in the review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language.
The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised bid will be accepted.
Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
No research can be included in more than one publication.

Section B: Authors’ responsibilities

Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
Authors must participate in the peer-review process.
Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors.

Section C: Reviewers’ responsibilities

Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.
Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
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: Editors’ responsibilities

Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
Editors should have a clear picture of the research’s funding sources.
Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers’ importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to publication’s scope.
Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably sure.
Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.
Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members. We follow the journal’s policies on authorship and contributorship in alignment with the guidelines provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

Complaints and Appeals

Appeals Process: Authors seeking reconsideration of a manuscript rejection should first reach out to the Handling Editor following the guidelines provided on the journal’s website. Since priority is given to active submissions under review, appeal decisions may take additional time. The editorial team will make the final determination on all appeals. Those wishing to challenge an editorial decision should consult the journal’s website for detailed instructions on submitting an appeal. If an appeal is approved, authors will receive guidance on the next steps in processing their manuscript.
Complaints Handling: This procedure applies to complaints related to process failures, such as excessive delays in manuscript handling, as well as concerns regarding publication ethics, including instances of author misconduct. For complaints regarding the rejection of a manuscript, please refer to the appeals policy outlined above. Concerns about process failures should initially be addressed by the Chief Editor/Editor-in-Chief of the journal or the Editor responsible for handling the manuscript.
Complaints About Processes: The Chief Editor/Editor-in-Chief, along with the Handling Editor and/or a member of the journal staff (as appropriate), will review and investigate concerns related to procedural delays, such as extended review times. The complainant will receive relevant feedback, and insights will be shared with stakeholders to refine and enhance journal processes and procedures.
Complaints about publication ethics, e.g., researcher, author, editor, or reviewer conduct The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor adheres to the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

Allegations of Research Misconduct Policy

ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts follows the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in addressing research misconduct. Authors must carefully review the journal’s author instructions and ethical policies before submission and ensure full compliance. While authors may suggest potential reviewers for the peer-review process, all reviewers undergo a thorough evaluation to verify their qualifications and assess any potential conflicts of interest before being invited to participate. Reports of research misconduct may relate to published articles or manuscripts under peer review. The handling of such complaints follows a process designed to ensure sensitivity, discretion, and confidentiality, outlined as follows:

The journal's editorial office receives a complaint alleging research misconduct in a submitted or published article. Complaints should be submitted on email id:editor@shodhkosh.com
Complainants must clearly specify the nature of the misconduct. For cases of plagiarism, the plagiarized section should be highlighted, and references to both the original and suspected articles must be provided.
If the misconduct complaint is acknowledged by the author(s), the editorial office will take appropriate action based on the circumstances:- If the article has already been published, an erratum or retraction may be issued to correct the issue, though wording disputes may arise.
If the misconduct is identified during the peer-review process, the review may continue, allowing the author(s) to make the necessary corrections.
In cases of nonresponse within the stipulated timeframe or an inadequate explanation, the article may be permanently retracted or rejected. Expert confirmation from relevant institutions or authorities may be sought before finalizing a decision.
The complainant will be informed of the resolution upon conclusion of the investigation.
Once the complaint is addressed, the case will be considered closed. Additional details can be found on their here Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

Conflicts of Interest Policy

ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts, we are committed to ensuring transparency and ethical integrity in scholarly publishing. To maintain the highest standards, we require all authors, reviewers, and editors to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may influence their work.

Author Disclosure:

Authors must declare any financial, institutional, or personal relationships that could impact the interpretation of their research.
If applicable, funding sources and affiliations must be clearly stated within the manuscript.
Authors must also disclose any personal or professional connections with organizations that may be affected by the research findings.

Reviewer Disclosure:

Reviewers should recuse themselves from evaluating manuscripts where they have competing interests.
Any financial or institutional ties to the research or authors must be reported to the editorial office before accepting a review assignment.
Reviewers are expected to provide objective assessments and must not use privileged information gained through peer review for personal or professional benefit.

Editor Disclosure:

Editors must disclose any conflicts of interest that may impact their ability to make impartial editorial decisions.
Editors with a financial, institutional, or personal connection to an author or manuscript should delegate the editorial process to an independent colleague.
Editorial board members must avoid handling submissions from their own institutions or collaborators with whom they have worked closely.

Management of Conflicts:

Any reported conflicts of interest will be assessed by the editorial office. If necessary, the journal may take corrective actions, including reassignment of manuscripts, re-evaluation of reviews, or disclosure statements.
If a conflict is discovered after publication, appropriate measures, such as issuing corrections or clarifications, will be taken to maintain transparency.
The journal follows ethical guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to ensure fair and unbiased publishing practices.

By adhering to this policy,ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts seeks to uphold the integrity and credibility of the scientific publishing process.

Data Sharing and Reproducibility Policy

ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts is dedicated to fostering transparency, openness, and reproducibility in scholarly research. Our commitment to data sharing and scientific integrity ensures that research findings can be validated and replicated. Our policies align with ethical guidelines and best practices in academic publishing.

Data Sharing Policy:

Encouraging Data Availability: Authors are encouraged to make their raw data, methodologies, and analysis code publicly accessible to enable verification, replication, and further research. Data should be deposited in a recognized public repository, with relevant details provided in the manuscript.
Exceptions: While we promote data sharing, we acknowledge that certain circumstances—such as privacy considerations, proprietary constraints, or ongoing research—may necessitate data restriction. In such cases, authors must provide a clear justification and outline measures taken to protect confidentiality.
Sensitive Data: Research involving sensitive data, such as patient records, must comply with ethical and legal standards, including anonymization and de-identification. Authors must ensure adherence to regulations such as GDPR and HIPAA to safeguard participant privacy.

Reproducibility of Research:

Reproducible Methods and Results: To facilitate research replication, authors should provide comprehensive methodological details, including experimental design, data collection, statistical analyses, and software specifications. Where possible, links to datasets, code, and supplementary materials should be included. Use of Open-Source Tools: The journal encourages the adoption of open-source software and tools to enhance transparency and reproducibility. When proprietary software is used, authors must specify access conditions, licensing details, and disclose any potential biases or limitations. By adhering to these principles,ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts aims to uphold scientific integrity and advance rigorous, reproducible research practices.

Ethical Oversight Policy

ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards in publishing. The journal ensures that all research complies with ethical guidelines, including integrity in authorship, peer review, and data transparency. Ethical concerns, such as conflicts of interest, plagiarism, or misconduct, are thoroughly investigated in accordance with industry best practices and the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). By upholding rigorous ethical oversight, we foster trust, credibility, and responsible scholarly communication.

Intellectual Property Policy

ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts respects and upholds intellectual property rights in academic publishing. Authors must ensure that all submitted content, including text, images, and data, complies with copyright laws and proper attribution standards. Any use of third-party materials requires appropriate permissions. The journal follows ethical publishing practices to safeguard originality and prevent unauthorized use of intellectual property.

Post-Publication Discussions Policy

Special Edition/ Guest Editor Policy

Though a journal's editorial team will extend an invitation directly to a guest editor (group) in some cases, we also welcome proposals made directly to a journal for a special issue on a particular topic. Specialized Guest Editors are invited to review articles for a Special Edition. The Guest Editors will be specialized in their fields and will be assigned for the Special Edition based on their Specialization to review articles under Special Edition Scopes. ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts publishes Special Edition on demand, If there is a trending topic interested by academicians and practitioners in the scope of journal, Please send us a proposal to editor@shodhkosh.com

The policy of Screening for Plagiarism

Papers submitted to ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts will be screened for plagiarism using CrossCheck/iThenticate plagiarism detection tools.ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Artswill immediately reject papers leading to plagiarism or self-plagiarism.

Before submitting articles to reviewers, those are first checked for similarity/plagiarism tool, by a member of the editorial team. The papers presented to the ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts must have a similarity level of less than 15%.

Plagiarism is exposing another person’s thoughts or words as though they were your own, without permission, credit, or acknowledgement, or because of failing to cite the sources properly. Plagiarism can take diverse forms, from literal copying to paraphrasing the work of another. To accurately judge whether an author has plagiarized, we emphasize the following possible situations:

An author may duplicate another author's work verbatim, in whole or in part, without obtaining permission, acknowledging the source, or referencing the source. This technique can be detected through a comparison of the source and the manuscript/work accused of plagiarism.
Significant copying entails an author reproducing a substantial portion of another author's work without permission, acknowledgement, or citation. The term itself can be interpreted in terms of both quality and quantity and is frequently used in the context of intellectual property. The term "condition" refers to the copied text's relative significance in relation to the entire work.
Paraphrasing is the process of incorporating ideas, words, or phrases from another source into new sentences inside the text. When the author fails to properly cite or acknowledge the original work/author, this practice becomes unethical. This is the more serious type of plagiarism to be recognised.

Text-recycling/Self-plagiarism Policy

Reproduction, in part or whole, of one's own previously, published work without adequate citation and proper acknowledgement and claiming the most recent work as new and original for any academic advantage amounts to "text recycling" (also known as "self-plagiarism") and is not acceptable

Text-recycling/self-plagiarism includes:

Republishing the same paper already published elsewhere without due and full citation;
Publishing smaller/excerpted work from a longer and previous without due and full citations in order to show a larger number of publications;
Reusing data already used in a published work, or communicated for publication, in another work without due and full citation;
Breaking up a longer/larger study into smaller sections and publishing them as altogether new work without due and full citation;
Paraphrasing one's own previously published work without due and full citation of the original.

Policy on Research Involving Human Participants and Subjects

As a result of the trend, researchers who do human subjects research are now required to declare that they have acted in line with any local or governmental rules and regulations regulating their research prior to publication. This has grown more prevalent in recent years.

Researchers that use human subjects or volunteers in their studies must adhere to strict ethical and regulatory guidelines. An important consideration for authors is that their human study must adhere to all applicable laws and regulations and the broad principles outlined below. To be on the safe side, authors should also make sure that their research practises adhering to the Ethics and Professional Conduct and other national and international standards, such as the Declaration of Helsinki, the Belmont Report, and the Common Rule. Suggestions of such standards include, but are not limited to the following:

minimization of possible harms, making sure any risks are worth the possible benefits.
protecting the privacy and right to make decisions for people who take part and subjects.
adhering to relevant institutional, national, and international rules and laws.
adhering to the idea of informed consent.
adhering to the principle of justice

Policy on the Declaration of Helsinki

1. Overview- The Declaration of Helsinki, adopted by the World Medical Association (WMA), is a cornerstone document establishing ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects, including identifiable human data and materials. It serves as a universal standard ensuring that medical research respects human rights, safety, dignity, and well-being. Researchers, editors, and publishers all share the ethical responsibility to ensure that studies and published results conform to these principles. Any research or manuscript that fails to meet the Declaration’s ethical requirements must not be accepted for publication.

2. General Ethical Requirements- All studies involving human subjects must demonstrate compliance with the Declaration’s ethical framework, including:

Review and approval by an independent ethics committee or institutional review board (IRB) prior to commencement.
Transparency through clinical trial registration in a publicly accessible registry.
Voluntary and informed consent obtained from all participants.
Data protection and confidentiality measures to safeguard participant information.
Adherence to beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice as ethical foundations of biomedical research.

3. Documentation Required for Publication- Before a manuscript can be accepted for publication, authors must submit three essential documents (in PDF format) to demonstrate compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki. These documents will be published alongside the article to ensure full transparency.

Ethics Committee Approval Statement

Purpose: To confirm that the study protocol was reviewed and approved by a qualified ethics committee before data collection began.

Requirements: The research protocol must detail:

Study design, objectives, and methodology.
Funding sources and sponsors.
Institutional affiliations of investigators.
Potential conflicts of interest.
Incentives or compensation to participants.
Provisions for treatment or compensation in case of injury or harm.
The ethics committee approval must be documented on official institutional letterhead, signed, and dated.
Only digital PDF copies are accepted (no faxed or printed versions).
The statement must be published with the article.

Clinical Trial Registration Statement

Purpose: To ensure transparency and accountability in clinical research through public registration.

Requirements

All clinical trials involving human subjects must be registered in a recognized public registry prior to the recruitment of the first subject.
The registration ensures that the design, methodology, and purpose of the trial are accessible to the public and can be independently verified.
Authors must provide:

Registry name (e.g., ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, ISRCTN, etc.), Clinical trial registration number (e.g., NCT00382018), A PDF confirmation of registration (no fax or print versions). The registration details must be published alongside the manuscript.

Informed Consent Statement

Purpose: To ensure participants voluntarily agree to participate in the study after being fully informed about its nature, risks, and benefits.

Requirements:Each subject must receive a clear and comprehensive explanation of-

Study aims, methodology, and duration.
Sources of funding and institutional affiliations.
Potential risks, discomforts, and benefits.
Researcher responsibilities and any conflicts of interest.
Participant rights, including the right to withdraw at any time.
Participation must be entirely voluntary.
Written informed consent must be obtained from all participants (or legal guardians where applicable).
The signed informed consent form (PDF) must be submitted with the manuscript.
Faxed or printed forms will not be accepted.
The consent statement should be published with the article.

Publication and Editorial Responsibility

Editors must verify that the submitted documents meet all ethical requirements before final acceptance. Manuscripts lacking any of the three required statements or documents will not be published. Publishers have a duty to ensure ethical transparency by publicly sharing approval and consent documentation.

Roles and Responsibilities

1.Authors- It is the authors' responsibility (individually and collectively) to adhere to and demonstrate compliance with this Policy. Authors are responsible for having their study reviewed and approved by local ethical review boards where such boards are necessary. Additionally, authors are accountable for the research's overall ethical conduct. All Authors must be prepared to give verifiable evidence that they followed local ethical and legal norms, as ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts may seek such documentation at any point following submission of the Work and prior to or after the publication of the Work.

2.Editors- EICs and AEs are responsible for informing authors of the presence of this policy. Additionally, they are in charge of establishing and explaining any publication-specific human subjects research policy. EICs and AEs are ultimately responsible for determining the appropriate mechanisms for enforcing this policy (including optionally such as questions about human participants and requiring submission of any appropriate documents as part of article submission) and for determining whether a submission is under review should be rejected for violating this policy.

3.Peer Reviewers- Reviewers have the possibility (and, if specified by the EICs and AEs, the need) to assess whether the human subjects research they are examining was done ethically and in accordance with applicable local regulations. Such concerns may be highlighted in reviews or by contacting the appropriate Editor directly.

Violations

ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts will examine alleged violations of this Policy upon obtaining reliable information from a specified individual(s) that an author(s) may have violated this Policy. To the degree practicable, claimants' identities will be kept secret.

The Editor-in-Chief will either engage directly with the author(s) to ensure compliance with this Policy or reject the submission if an accusation of potential misconduct relates to an unpublished submission to the journal.

When a complaint of possible misconduct relates to a work already published by ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts, the ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts Board shall determine whether the work breaches this policy. ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts will collaborate with the Board to conduct an investigation and provide advice on the issue.

Additional Resources

WMA Declaration of Helsinki – ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Available on
The Belmont Report. Available on
International Compilation of Human Research Standards, 2020 Edition. Available on
Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects ('Common Rule'). Available on
Ethical concerns about a study involving human subjects, COPE. Available on
Committee on Human Research. Available on

Animal Experimentation Policy

The Journal adheres to internationally accepted ethical standards for animal research. Authors must ensure humane treatment of animals and compliance with institutional, national, and international regulations.

1. Ethics Approval

All studies involving animals must receive prior approval from an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) or equivalent ethics board. The manuscript must include the committee name, institution, and approval number/date. Field studies require necessary collection and wildlife permits.

2. Humane Care and the 3Rs

Research must follow the principles of Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement (3Rs). Authors should describe measures taken to minimize animal suffering and number, justify the species and sample size, and report housing, care, and husbandry according to recognized standards such as the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals or EU Directive 2010/63/EU.

3. Pain, Distress, and Euthanasia

Methods for anesthesia, analgesia, monitoring, and humane endpoints must be clearly stated. Euthanasia procedures must comply with the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals (2020) or equivalent.

4. Reporting Standards

Authors must follow the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines and submit the completed checklist as supplementary material. All experimental details, including animal numbers, randomization, blinding, and inclusion/exclusion criteria, must be transparently reported.

5. Statement in Manuscript

Manuscripts must include an ethical statement such as: “All animal procedures were approved by the [Institutional Animal Ethics Committee, Protocol No., Date] and conducted in accordance with [relevant national/international regulations].”

6. Editorial Oversight

Manuscripts lacking ethics approval, incomplete welfare details, or non-compliance with reporting standards may be returned for revision or rejected.

Policy On Vulnerable Populations

1. Definition and Scope of Vulnerable Populations

Clearly define who qualifies as a vulnerable population in the journal’s context—e.g., children under 18, individuals with cognitive impairments, or those in dependent relationships (students, patients, prisoners, etc.).

2. Ethical Review Requirements

State that all research involving vulnerable groups must: Receive prior approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethics Committee. Comply with the Declaration of Helsinki and other national or international ethical guidelines.

3. Informed Consent and Assent

Explain that: Parental/guardian consent and child assent (when age-appropriate) are required. Researchers must ensure comprehension and voluntary participation. Any deviation must be justified and ethically approved.

4. Privacy, Confidentiality, and Data Handling

Include safeguards for: Protecting identities (especially in case studies or photos). Avoiding publication of identifiable data without explicit consent. Stating how data are anonymized or pseudonymized.

5. Editorial Oversight

Mention that: The Editor-in-Chief and reviewers will assess manuscripts for compliance. Non-compliance with ethical standards will result in rejection or retraction.

6. Transparency on Journal Webpage

It’s recommended to dedicate a webpage section titled “Ethical Policies for Research Involving Vulnerable Populations” within the journal’s Publication Ethics or Author Guidelines. This enhances transparency and helps authors, reviewers, and readers understand the journal’s ethical stance.

Cell Lines, Plants, GMOs and Environmental Samples

For established cell lines, authors must state the source, authentication, and mycoplasma-testing status, and confirm that the use was approved by a relevant committee where needed. For plants, algae, fungi and microbial strains, authors must confirm compliance with local and international regulations (e.g., collection permits, Nagoya Protocol where applicable). For genetically modified organisms (GMOs), authors must report relevant biosafety approvals and containment conditions.

Dual-Use Research and Biosecurity

Research that could reasonably be misapplied to pose a threat to public health, agriculture, animals, the environment or national security is considered dual-use. Authors must flag any dual-use aspects to the editor on submission. Editors may seek additional expert advice and, where necessary, may reject or requestredaction of sensitive methodological details.

Sex and Gender in Research

Where relevant, authors should report the sex and/or gender of human participants, animals or cells, analyse and discuss sex/gender differences where appropriate, or justify single-sex studies.

Advertising and Sponsorship

Where advertising or sponsorship appears, it will not influence editorial decisions or the peer-review process. Sponsored supplements or special issues will be clearly labelled. Any potential conflicts of interest will be disclosed.

Updates to these Policies

These policies may be updated from time to time to reflect evolving best practices, legal requirements and community expectations. The latest version available on the Granthaalayah website applies to all new submissions from the date of posting.

Special Issues and Thematic Collections

1.Purpose and Definition

A Special Issue (or Thematic Collection) is a group of articles focused on a specific, clearly defined theme, published under the banner of a Granthaalayah journal. Special Issues may be proposed by members of the Editorial Board, qualified external Guest Editors, or linked to conferences, symposia or funded research projects. All Special Issues are subject to the same ethical standards, peer-review procedures and quality criteria as regular issues of the journal.

2.Proposal and Approval Process

Special Issues must be approved by the Editor-in-Chief (EIC) and/or the journal’s main Editorial Board before any public announcement or call for papers. A written Special Issue Proposal should normally include: proposed title and description; names and affiliations of proposed Guest Editors; tentative contributor list or expected number of articles; expected timeline; and any funding or sponsorship arrangements.

3.Guest Editors: Role and Responsibilities

Guest Editors manage the editorial and peer-review process for submissions to the Special Issue, in coordination with the journal’s EIC. They must ensure that all submissions undergo fair, rigorous, and timely peer review in accordance with the journal’s policies. The Editor-in-Chief retains ultimate responsibility for all editorial decisions and may overrule Guest Editor recommendations where necessary to maintain quality and ethical standards. Guest Editors must not handle the review of their own submissions or submissions from close collaborators, students, or colleagues where a conflict of interest exists.

4.Peer Review and Quality Standards

Articles submitted to a Special Issue follow the same peer-review model and acceptance criteria as regular submissions. Acceptance is not guaranteed for any invited or conference-related submissions; all manuscripts may be accepted, revised, or rejected based on merit and reviewer reports. If the number or quality of accepted manuscripts is lower than anticipated, the journal may publish a smaller Special Issue, combine accepted papers into a regular issue, or cancel the Special Issue if quality cannot be assured.

5.Conflicts of Interest in Special Issues

Guest Editors must declare any conflicts of interest with submitted manuscripts and recuse themselves from handling those papers. >Authors submitting to a Special Issue must follow the same Conflicts of Interest disclosure requirements as for regular issues. Any sponsorship or financial support related to the Special Issue must be fully disclosed.

6.Sponsored and Conference-Related Special Issues

Special Issues may be associated with scientific conferences, workshops or symposia, or with funded research projects or networks. Calls for Papers for such Special Issues must clearly state that all submissions will undergo independent peer review and are not automatically accepted. Articles based on conference presentations must be substantially extended and adapted to journal format, not simple proceedings reprints. Sponsorship or APC support from conferences or funders must not influence editorial decisions; sponsorship details will be clearly disclosed on the Special Issue webpage and/or in the editorial introduction.

7.Integration, Indexing and Archiving

Special Issue articles are fully integrated into the journal’s regular volumes and issue numbering (or continuous publication system) and treated identically in terms of indexing, DOIs, archiving and citation. Each Special Issue may have a dedicated landing page or section on the journal’s website, including title and description of the theme, names and affiliations of Guest Editors, and a list of published articles with links. Special Issue content remains permanently accessible as part of the journal’s open-access archive and is subject to the same correction, retraction and post-publication policies as all other articles.

Archiving

This journal utilizes the PORTICO system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

Withdrawal of Manuscripts

The author is not allowed to withdraw submitted manuscripts, because the withdrawal is a waste of valuable resources that editors and referees spent a great deal of time processing submitted manuscript, and works invested by the publisher.

If the author still requests withdrawal of his/her manuscript when the manuscript is still in the peer-reviewing process, the author will be punished with paying USD ($) 200 or INR 2000 (Indian Author) per document, as withdrawal penalty to the publisher. However, it is unethical to withdraw a submitted manuscript from one journal if accepted by another journal.

The withdrawal of the manuscript after the manuscript is accepted for publication; the author will be punished by paying USD ($) 400 or INR 4000 (Indian Author) per document. Removal of paper is only allowed after the withdrawal penalty has been fully paid to the Publisher. If the author doesn't agree to pay the death, the author and his/her affiliation will be blacklisted for publication in this journal. Even his/her previously published articles will be removed from our online system.

Article Retraction

Infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like. Occasionally a retraction will be used to correct errors in submission or publication. The retraction of an article by its authors or the editor under the advice of members of the scholarly community has long been an occasional feature of the learned world. Standards for dealing with retractions have been developed by a number of library and scholarly bodies, and this best practice is adopted for article retraction by Granthaalayah:

The title in meta data will be updated to insert the word "WITHDRAWN:" ahead of the existing title.
The original article is retained unchanged save for a watermark on the .pdf indicating on each page that it is "WITHDRAWN"
The Notices of retraction will be updated in abstract section of meta data with Article citing details, Article retracted by and Reason(s) for retraction.
The HTML version of the document will be removed.
Any other format galley will be removed.

Note that if Authors retain copyright for an article this does not mean they automatically have the right to retract it after publication. The integrity of the published scientific record is of paramount importance and COPE’s Retraction Guidelines still apply in such cases.