Ethical Charter for the "Adab Arabi" Journal

A. For Authors

1. Originality

• Manuscripts submitted to Adab Arabi must be original and novel. Authors may not submit a manuscript that is under consideration elsewhere, in whole or in part. Similarly, they may not submit a manuscript under review at Adab Arabi to another publication.

• The submitted work, in whole or in part, must not have been previously published or accepted for publication in Persian or any other language.

• Authors must explicitly acknowledge the work and ideas of others, even if not directly quoted or paraphrased. Verbatim text from other sources must be placed within quotation marks with appropriate citation.

• The manuscript must specify the origin and originality of all data sets used. If proprietary data has been used elsewhere by the author or others, the manuscript must cite these prior works, whether published or unpublished.

• Authors should not submit a manuscript previously rejected by this journal. If a prior version was rejected and the author wishes to submit a revised version, the justification for resubmission must be transparently communicated to the editor. Resubmission is only permitted under specific circumstances.

2. Plagiarism

• Article registration is confirmed via email to all authors. Listing as an author implies a significant role in preparing the manuscript. If an individual's name has been used without their contribution, they must immediately notify the journal via the received email.

• All authors are responsible for the work's originality. The journal reserves the right to assess all plagiarism cases. Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:

  • a. Attributing another's work to oneself.

  • b. Including the names of individuals who did not contribute to the research (honorary authorship).

  • c. Copying or replicating significant portions of another article (even one's own previously published work without attribution - self-plagiarism).

  • d. Presenting the results of others' research as one's own.

  • e. Duplicate publication of the same article by the same author in multiple journals.

  • f. Reporting false or scientifically inaccurate results or distorting research findings.

  • g. Using invalid data or manipulating research data.

• Plagiarism is investigated rigorously. Consequences, based on severity, include:

  1. Immediate rejection or retraction of the published article.

  2. Blacklisting all authors in the Adab Arabi database.

  3. Legal pursuit through competent judicial authorities.

  4. Sharing the case details with relevant national and international universities and journals.

  5. Formal notification to the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology, ISC, and all institutions where the authors may have used the article for academic credit.

3. Statement on Preventing and Combating Plagiarism

• Adab Arabi adheres to all COPE guidelines on copyright and research ethics. All persuasive evidence of misconduct is examined, and we follow COPE's flowcharts and procedures.

• Editorial board members and reviewers take necessary measures to verify the originality, reliability of information, and proper use of sources in submitted manuscripts. Policies include:

  • Ensuring only original, novel works are submitted. Proper citation must be given for all use of others' work. Plagiarism in any form is unethical and unacceptable. Articles that are compilations of previously published material without original interpretation are rejected.

  • Manuscripts are screened using IranDoc, Samim Noor, and iThenticate plagiarism detection software. If plagiarism is detected, the manuscript is immediately rejected, and authors are blacklisted for five years. Authors are advised to check their manuscripts before submission.

  • While legal penalties are determined by the government, the journal reserves the right to retract any article found to contain plagiarism.

• Authors must ensure the submitted version is:

  • An original, novel, and innovative work.

  • Free of plagiarism.

  • Not previously published in any language.

  • Properly cites all sentences and information from other sources.

  • Complies with copyright laws. Copyright-protected material (e.g., tables, charts, figures, photos, lengthy quotations) requires permission from the copyright holder for reuse.

• The journal is responsible for upholding publication ethics, particularly by disclosing plagiarism and retracting works with ethical misconduct. Reviewers and editors have the right to screen submissions for plagiarism.

• The overall similarity index for a submitted manuscript must be less than 10%, with a maximum of 1% similarity from any single source.

4. Conflicts of Interest

• The corresponding author must declare all sources of financial support for the research within the manuscript. Any declared conflicts of interest will be published alongside the article. Any situation that could be perceived as a conflict must be disclosed to the Publications Office or Editor-in-Chief.

• Upon submission, the corresponding author may suggest potential reviewers. Authors must avoid any potential conflict of interest in the selection of editors and reviewers. This applies to all co-authors. The corresponding author must download, complete, and submit a conflict of interest form.

• Examples of potential conflicts include:

  1. An author is affiliated with the same institution as the editor or a suggested reviewer.

  2. An author was a member of the thesis committee of the editor/reviewer, or vice versa.

  3. An author and the editor/reviewer are currently co-authoring another manuscript or have been co-authors within the past two years.

  4. Authors must not suggest reviewers who they know have already read and commented on a previous version of the manuscript, as this violates the double-blind peer-review process.

5. Double-Blind Peer Review

• The journal employs a double-blind peer-review process where the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other.

• Authors must respect the confidentiality of the process and not reveal their identity to reviewers. Manuscripts must not contain any self-identifying information.

• Authors must not post their submitted manuscript (including early drafts) on websites where they could be easily identified by reviewers.

• Authors must not nominate individuals as editors or reviewers who they know have previously read and commented on the manuscript, as this violates the double-blind process.

6. Accuracy

• Authors are ultimately responsible for the entire content of their submission. They must present an accurate account of the research performed and an objective discussion of its significance.

• Findings must be reported completely; data relevant to the research questions must not be omitted. Results must be reported whether they support or contradict expected outcomes. Authors should exercise special care in presenting the properties and interpretation of their findings. Fundamental assumptions, theories, methods, metrics, and research designs must be clearly stated.

• The article must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work.

• If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their work, they must promptly notify the journal editor to cooperate on retracting or correcting the manuscript. If a third party identifies a significant error in a published work, the author must promptly provide evidence of the original article's correctness or cooperate with the editor on a correction or retraction.

7. Authorship

• All listed authors must have made significant contributions to the research and share accountability for the results. Authorship credit should reflect the relative contribution. Authors should take responsibility and credit only for work they have actually performed. Typically, a student should be listed as the primary co-author on multi-author papers derived substantially from their thesis/dissertation.

• The corresponding author must send a copy of the manuscript to all co-authors and obtain their consent for submission and publication.

8. Human Subjects

• Authors are responsible for protecting the privacy, dignity, welfare, and freedom of human research participants. Studies involving human subjects (fieldwork, simulations, interviews) must comply with the ethical regulations of the author's university.

• In Adab Arabi, all participants have the right to privacy. Researchers must not violate this without informed consent. Identifying information (e.g., names, etc.) must not be published in text, photos, or genealogies unless scientifically essential and written informed consent for publication has been obtained from the participants (or their parents/guardians). Consent forms must be written, recorded, and archived per national/local regulations.

9. Timeliness

• Authors should respond promptly and appropriately to revision requests. If an author cannot meet the set deadline (maximum one month), they must contact the editor immediately to request an extension or withdraw from the review process.

B. For Editors

1. Independence
Editors must maintain editorial independence and work to ensure authors have freedom of expression. The decision to accept or reject a manuscript rests with the editors, typically informed by reviewer recommendations. However, manuscripts deemed entirely unsuitable may be rejected without external review.

2. Impartiality
Editors must evaluate manuscripts confidentially, without bias, and constructively. They must judge manuscripts solely on their academic merit, without personal or ideological prejudice.

3. Conflicts of Interest
Editors must avoid actions that create or appear to create a conflict of interest.

• To avoid potential conflicts, an editor must not handle their own submitted manuscript. Responsibility must be delegated to a qualified person (e.g., a previous editor or editorial board member). An author-editor making editorial decisions on their own work is never acceptable.

• Editors should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts where they have a real or potential conflict of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, financial, or other relationships with authors, companies, or institutions connected to the paper. Examples include:

  1. The editor and author are employed by the same institution.

  2. The editor was a member of the author's thesis committee, or vice versa.

  3. The editor and author are current co-authors or have been co-authors within the past two years.

4. Double-Blind Peer Review & Confidentiality
The journal follows a double-blind peer-review process. Editors and editorial staff must not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and potential reviewers. Procedures are in place to safeguard confidentiality. Unpublished materials must not be used in an editor's own research without the author's written consent. Confidential information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

5. Review Quality
Typically, two reviewers are invited per manuscript. Editors should routinely assess the quality of all reviews. In rare cases, an editor may edit a review before sending it to the author (e.g., to remove phrasing that reveals the reviewer's identity) or not send an unconstructive review. Reviewer performance metrics should be periodically evaluated to ensure optimal journal performance and inform reappointment decisions. This data must be available to editors and kept confidential.

6. Timeliness
Editors must ensure timely assessment of all manuscripts. An initial evaluation and reviewer selection should occur within a set deadline (maximum one week after receipt). Editors should respond promptly to author inquiries about status.

7. Decision Quality
Editors are responsible for clearly communicating editorial decisions to authors. Decision letters should be high-quality, synthesizing reviewer recommendations and offering additional suggestions. A decision should not be communicated merely by attaching a set of reviewer comments without explanation.

8. Accuracy
If convincing evidence of a significant error in an unpublished manuscript is presented, the editor must promptly inform the author. For a published article, the editor must facilitate the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, or expression of concern.

9. Authority
The editor has ultimate authority and responsibility for the journal. The editor must respect the journal's constituents (readers, authors, reviewers, staff, publisher) and work to ensure the integrity of the journal's content and its continuous quality improvement. The editor selects editorial board members, defines their rights and responsibilities, and regularly evaluates their performance.

10. Performance
The editor should establish journal performance metrics. The journal should publish annual audits on acceptance rates, publication intervals, the percentage of manuscripts sent for external review, and other performance data. These metrics should be used to evaluate and improve the review and publication processes.

C. For Reviewers

1. Reciprocity
Peer review is a professional activity that underpins the value of the academic profession and should be encouraged. Researchers who submit to the journal are expected to reciprocate by accepting review invitations when possible.

2. Right to Decline
It is necessary to decline a review request due to time constraints or expertise. A reviewer who feels unqualified to assess a manuscript should decline. Reviewers must decline if a potential conflict of interest exists. If asked to review a manuscript they have previously reviewed for another journal, they should inform the editor unless a re-review is explicitly requested.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review
The journal uses a double-blind process. Reviewers must decline to review manuscripts on which they have already provided written feedback to the author in a previous version. If a reviewer recognizes the author's identity, they should naturally decline. Reviewers are responsible for avoiding any writing, comments, or actions that could reveal their identity to the author.

4. Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts involving conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, financial, organizational, personal, or other connections to related companies, institutions, or people. Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts to the editor, who will determine the appropriate level of their involvement. An example is having a similar manuscript under review elsewhere or a similar research project in progress. Under double-blind review, reviewers are unlikely to know of conflicts related to the authors and are thus not limited by them. If reviewers become aware of such a conflict, they must notify the editor.

5. Impartiality
Reviews must be conducted objectively, impartially, and professionally. Personal bias must be avoided in recommendations and judgments.

6. Confidentiality
Reviewers must respect the confidentiality of the peer-review process. Manuscripts are confidential documents. They must not be discussed with anyone other than the editor, and their contents must not be shared without permission. Suspected misconduct should be reported confidentially to the editor, not discussed elsewhere until an official announcement is made.

7. Accuracy
Reviewers should remember that their assessment influences scientific judgment. They should be constructive and honest in their comments to the author. Judgments must be explained and supported sufficiently with details to justify recommendations to both the author and the editor. Reviewers should not be dichotomous (e.g., overly friendly to the author but highly negative in comments to the editor).

8. Timeliness
Reviewers must respond promptly. If a reviewer cannot meet the deadline (maximum one month), they should immediately contact the editor to negotiate an extension or decline, allowing for a new reviewer to be appointed.

D. Copyright and Licensing

All articles accepted by Adab Arabi are published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license.

• Under this license:

  • Authors retain copyright of their published work.

  • Others are free to share (copy, redistribute) and adapt (remix, transform, build upon) the material.

  • Appropriate credit must be given to the author and original source (citation).

  • The material may not be used for commercial purposes.

E. Open Access Statement

The University of Tehran, as the publisher of Adab Arabi, fully endorses and follows the Budapest Open Access Initiative. This journal is a full Open Access publication.

• This means:

  • All articles are immediately available upon acceptance (as Ahead of Print) and upon publication (Open Access) to all users worldwide free of charge.

  • Use, distribution, and sharing in any medium is permitted provided the original author(s) and source are correctly cited.

• Benefits for authors include:

  • Retention of copyright by the authors.

  • Free and open access for all readers globally.

  • Increased accessibility, visibility, and readership.

  • Potential for increased citation.

  • No geographical access restrictions.

  • Rapid publication.

  • https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
  •