Nuart Journal follows COPE’s Core Practices for scholarly publishing. It is expected that authors, reviewers and editors will follow these guidelines on ethical conduct. Key guidelines are summarised below. Please refer to the Core Practices for further details.
DUTIES OF EDITORS
Fair play and editorial independence
All submitted manuscripts are evaluated only with regard to their scholarly and/or artistic merit and their relevance to the aims and scope of the journal, without regard to the author’s gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnic origin, citizenship, religion, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation. The editorial content of the journal, and the timing of the publication of this content, is the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief.
Submitted manuscripts will not be shared, or any information about them disclosed, to any person other than the corresponding author, peer reviewers (and potential reviewers), and the Editorial Team.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All information contained in submitted manuscripts remains confidential until publication. Editors and peer reviewers will be expected to excuse themselves from involvement with manuscripts where there are any conflicts of interest arising from commercial or personal relationships with any of the authors or institutions connected to the submission. Parties should flag any potential conflicts of interest to the Editor-in-Chief such that another member of the Editorial Team will handle the manuscript.
All submitted manuscripts will undergo peer review by at two peer reviewers who are recognised as experts in the field. However, the Editor-in-Chief is ultimately responsible for publication decisions, which are based on the peer reviewers’ evaluation of the manuscript, its relevance and importance to the readers of the journal and other researchers in the field, and any legal issues, including plagiarism, libel, and copyright infringement. Editorial decisions may involve consultation with the Editorial Team, the International Editorial Advisory Board, and independent peer reviewers.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
The Editorial Board will take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of manuscripts where misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism has occurred. The Editorial Board will investigate any ethical concerns raised about a submitted manuscript or published paper. After investigation, if an ethical concern proves founded, it may be appropriate to publish a correction, retraction, or note in the journal.
DUTIES OF REVIEWERS
Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review is essential to the quality of scholarship represented in the journal, and greatly assists authors in improving their manuscript.
If a reviewer is unable to review a manuscript, they should immediately notify the Editors so that an alternative reviewer can be contacted. Suggestions for alternative reviewers with relevant expertise are very welcome.
Reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts as confidential. They must not be shared with others. This also applies to reviewers who have declined an invitation to review.
Standards of objectivity and collegial communication
All reviews and observations made on submitted manuscripts should be conducted objectively, in a collegial tenor. Personal criticism of any author, or any inappropriate commentary on their work, is not acceptable, and reviewers will be asked to rephrase or retract any such commentary prior to sharing their review with a manuscript’s author. Reviews should refer to relevant sections of the manuscript clearly, with supporting arguments, and make constructive suggestions for improvement, which may include, but is not limited to, structural or logical changes and the incorporation and acknowledgment of further relevant literature.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should contact the editors if they are aware of any considerable similarity between a submitted manuscript and another existing manuscript (whether published or unpublished). It is also the reviewers’ duty to identify and report any published work that they are aware of that has not been cited by a manuscript’s authors. Relevant citations should always be used to support statements, arguments, or observations derived from prior work.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Invited referees are expected to decline reviewing manuscripts where there are any conflicts of interest arising from commercial or personal relationships with any of the authors or institutions connected to the submission. Invited reviewers should flag any potential conflicts of interest to the Editor-in-Chief so that an alternative reviewer can be contacted. Information from submitted manuscripts must be kept confidential and must not be used in a reviewer’s own research, unless the authors of the manuscript have given written consent. This applies both to reviewers and to those who have declined an invitation to review.
DUTIES OF AUTHORS
Authors of academic articles should give an accurate account of their research and an objective discussion of their work’s significance and impact. Visual articles should present a contextual account of the background to the work, and a coherent visual narrative, with the copyright to all photographs included clearly identified. Experimental and opinion pieces must be clearly identified as such. Review articles should be objective and thorough. Interviews should indicate the identity of the interviewer and the interviewee(s) (with their consent) and all transcripts submitted should be an accurate reflection of the original conversation.
Originality and plagiarism
Only original works should be submitted. If authors draw on the work of others, they must ensure that this is cited. Authors should also cite any works that have been influential in the development of their submitted work. Plagiarism is unacceptable.
Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication
Manuscripts that have been submitted or published in another journal or primary publication should not be submitted for consideration. The publication of an abridged or updated article that has already been published is sometimes justifiable, however the authors and editors of the journals concerned should consent to this secondary publication, and the original article should be cited in the secondary publication.
Authorship of the manuscript
All listed authors for a manuscript should meet the following criteria: 1) Significant contribution to the design/conception, data collection, and/or analysis; 2) Involvement in drafting the manuscript or making significant critical revisions. 3) All listed authors must also have approved the final draft of the manuscript and consented to its submission. Those who do not meet these criteria for authorship, but who have contributed to the research reported in the manuscript, should be listed in the acknowledgement section (with their permission). It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to ensure these criteria are applied, and that all co-authors have approved the final version of the manuscript, and consented to its publication.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest at the time of submission. These may include financial conflicts of interest, such as grants and consultancies, and non-financial conflicts, such as relationships (whether personal or professional) and affiliations. Sources for financial support for the research reported should be disclosed.
Acknowledgement of sources
Authors must acknowledge, where appropriate, the work of others, alongside any publications that have been influential in developing their work. Any private communications cited must have written consent from the source. Further, it is expected that authors will not make use of confidential information obtained by reviewing manuscripts or grant applications, save in the case of the author(s) of these works giving written permission to use this information.
Copyright over images used
It is the responsibility of authors to gain copyright permissions for any images used in their manuscript prior to publication. The written permission of the photographer (if this is not the author) must be obtained, unless the images used have a creative commons license, in which case, the photographer should still be attributed, where practicable. Authors should also give the name(s) of any artist(s) whose work is featured in the photographs they have included. Where this is not possible, authors should state “artist unknown” in the caption to the photograph.
Research involving human participants
If the research reported involves human participants, authors are expected to have obtained ethics permissions from appropriate institutional committees in compliance with relevant laws – such manuscripts should contain a statement to this effect. The right to privacy of participants should be observed in all cases.
Peer review process
Authors must engage with the peer review process, and should respond promptly and systematically to any comments or suggestions made by reviewers, and to any requests for further information (e.g., copyright permissions, clarifications) made by Editors. Authors should ensure that revised manuscripts are resubmitted by the deadline set. If an author cannot meet the deadline for resubmission, they should communicate this to the Editor.
Significant inaccuracies in published articles
If an author becomes aware of a significant inaccuracy or error in their published article, they must notify the Editor and work with them to resolve the situation, either by issuing an erratum or by retracting the article. If the Editor becomes aware of such an inaccuracy, they will contact the author(s), who will then either provide evidence of the correctness of the paper or, if in agreement as to the inaccuracy, correct or retract the paper.
Nuart Journal’s Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement is based on COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers (both now retired) and the current COPE Core Practices.