PRP Statement
Pioneer Research Publications Pvt. Ltd. (PRP) strongly adheres to the principles of publication ethics outlined in the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices documents. These principles provide guidance on handling ethical concerns, such as conflicts of interest, disputes regarding authorship and contributions, allegations of misconduct, data issues, plagiarism and content overlap, and integrity of the peer review process.
While PRP provides infrastructural and administrative support, the International Journal of Space Applications (IJSA) maintains complete editorial independence in accordance with COPE’s position on ethical editing and decision-making. Editorial decisions are made solely by the Editorial Board, based on the scholarly merit and relevance of the submissions, free from undue influence by the publisher, funders, or other external entities.
However, in instances where ethical or legal concerns arise, including violations of publication ethics, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or breach of journal policies, the publisher may, if necessary, revise editorial decisions. This could involve rescinding acceptance of a manuscript or issuing post-publication corrections or retractions, in accordance with COPE’s guidelines on maintaining the integrity of the academic record.
IJSA Statement on Publication Ethics
The International Journal of Space Applications fully adheres to the COPE Guidelines. The journal maintains a rigorous peer review process, along with clear ethical policies and standards, to support the publication of high-quality scientific research in the field. Only those submitted manuscripts that comply with the editorial and ethical policies, outlined on this webpage and in the ‘Instructions for Authors,’ will be included for the peer-review process.
Ethical Guidelines for Authors during Submission
Authors submitting their work to the International Journal of Space Applications must ensure that their manuscripts meet the following requirements:
Accurately present the research findings with an objective discussion.
Provide correct authorship information by including only those who qualify for authors. The minimum recognized requirements for authorship are that authors must have made a substantial contribution to the research and be accountable for the work undertaken (COPE Discussion document: authorship). Those who contributed to the work but do not qualify for authorship should be listed in the acknowledgments section.
Disclose that could be perceived as a possible conflict of interest at the time of submission.
Present data and methods in sufficient detail to warrant transparency and allow others to replicate the research.
Acknowledge the research funder and the individuals, organizations, or institutions involved in any stage of data collection, data analysis, manuscript preparation, editing, or where the work was conducted.
Remember that submitting manuscripts to more than one journal at the same time is not allowed.
Ensure that the research results are novel/original and have not been published before. If this article is an expansion of the author's previous publication, cite the earlier publication and also explain the value addition in new manuscript.
It is the sole responsibility of the authors to obtain permission from the copyright holder to publish any previously published content, such as quotations, text, images, figures, tables etc. Moreover, authors must also ensure strict compliance of plagiarism guidelines adopted globally.
Quickly communicate any errors or inaccuracies found after submission.
Ethical Guidelines during Peer Review
Peer review is a system based on confidentiality, professionalism, and ethical behaviour. All members involved in the publication process - authors, editors, and reviewers - should adhere to the principles summarized below for transparent completion of the peer review process.
(i) Responsibilities of the Reviewer
Provide a prompt, thorough, and impartial review of the article.
Give constructive feedback with reasonable suggestions and a professional tone.
Avoid suggesting infeasible additions in the research work carried out by the authors.
Alert the editor to any suspected ethical issues.
Maintain confidentiality by safeguarding the authors' contributions.
(ii) Responsibilities of the Authors
Carefully revise the article as per reviewers’ comments, demonstrating thoughtful engagement with their feedback.
If a specific comment cannot be incorporated, provide a well-reasoned justification for it.
Ensure all revisions, suggested or otherwise, comply with the journal’s guidelines and adhere to ethical standards.
Submit the revised manuscript by the specified deadline to prevent unnecessary delays in the review and publication process.
In case of excessive and unreasonable delay in the submission of revised manuscript, the manuscript will be treated as a new submission.
(iii) Responsibilities of the Editor
Select and invite reviewers who are experts in their fields or have published prior work on the topic related to the manuscript to ensure a fair and meaningful review process.
Obtain at least one review report from a reviewer not included in the authors’ suggestion of preferred reviewers.
Avoid sending the manuscript to non-preferred reviewers suggested by the authors.
Ensure a speedy peer review process for quick publication.
Maintain confidentiality by preserving the reviewer’s anonymity and by safeguarding the unique contributions of the author’s work.
Ensure that a member of the Editorial Board does not handle an article in which he/she is listed as an author.
(Please note that these guidelines are not exhaustive. All parties involved are strongly encouraged to uphold and adhere to universally accepted ethical standards and best practices.)