Journal of the Society for Application of Statistics in Agriculture and Allied Sciences (SASAA)

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of RASHI

the Journal of the Society for Application of Statistics in Agriculture and Allied Sciences (SASAA)

During publication of the "RASHI" steps and measures are taken to uphold the highest standard of publication ethics and to reduce malpractices. Authors must submit and declare that the submitted article is the outcome of their original work and is free from any type of copying or plagiarism. Acknowledging the credit and refer work(s) or words of others or sources (including financial / intellectual etc.) are must by the authors.
Authors must disclose  the actual or potential conflict of interest (if any). RASHI always insists on minimization and disclosure of any conflict of interest among the authors, reviewers, editors. The Journal is devoted to fair and blind peer review of the articles. Any form of deviations / shortcomings of the above should be brought to the notice of the Chief Editor for immediate redressal and the Editorial Board is committed to this mission.
Articles arising out of  investigation in Animal Sciences should be in compliance with the Animal Ethics of the Institution where the actual work has been carried out and a statement by the authors in this regard is necessary. RASHI is strongly against unethical animal investigation/ experimentations.
All articles submitted for possible publications are processed with appropriate respect to the confidentiality of the work, authors and the reviewers. Possible steps are taken towards not disclosing of any information about manuscripts in any form other than the authors, reviewers (partly) and the Chief Editor. All articles submitted for possible publications are privileged communications; comments, findings, data used, work referred are the responsibility of the authors. Reviewers  should refrain themselves from making copies of the manuscript, sharing with others, except with the permission of the Chief Editor.
The Editorial Board of RASHI always insists on best practices in every field and also expects the authors, the reviewers to follow the COPE guidelines on ethical behavior. The journal encourages the best standards of publication ethics and take all possible measures against publication malpractices. The Society for Application of Statistics in Agriculture and Allied Sciences (SASAA) as a publisher, supervises at all stages of publication with utmost sincerity.  
Based on Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines a summary of the key points for the Editors, the Authors and the Reviewers is provided below.
A) Duties of Authors
Reporting standards
Original research works  are expected to be  presented for possible consideration of publication. Description of  the work performed and the results obtained thereof alongwith  with  objective discussion of the significance of the work with reference to the previous work(s) and the present work must be presented in truthful way. The article should be enriched with sufficient detail and references to help others to in formulating and performing their research works. Review articles should be specific area based objective and comprehensive, as far as possible exhaustive with up to date information.
Data access and retention
The authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study for editorial review and should be ready to make the data publicly available if practicable and deemed necessary by the editorial board. Such data should be maintained for at least 10 years after publication
Plagiarism Check
Plagiarism takes many forms, and any form is unethical and unacceptable. Every article undergoes rigorous plagiarism check. Authors should ensure that they have worked, written and submitted original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, including those have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should have been appropriately cited.
Simultaneous submission/publication
Submission of a manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal is unethical and unacceptable. Concurrent submission  and or publication of research articles based essentially the same research work in more than one journal is highly unethical and are discouraged. Authors should refrain themselves from submitting a manuscript that has already been submitted / published in another journal.
Authorship of the manuscript
All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript must  only be listed. Authorship of the manuscript is ascertained by the  significant contributions to  (i) the concept, ii) designing the experiment, iii) execution, iv) data acquisition, v) analysis/interpretation of the study; (vi) preparation of the manuscript viii) revision of the manuscript for its intellectual quality etc. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors  as per their contribution listed above and no inappropriate coauthors are included and also verify that all coauthors have approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication. 
Disclosure of conflicts of interest
The authors / corresponding author (on behalf of all the authors), during the submission of the manuscript should disclose any conflict of interest. Potential conflicts of interest like financial educational grants or other funding, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, other financial or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements along with  personal or professional relationships, affiliations etc. should clearly be disclosed.
Acknowledgement of sources
Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and also cited such  publications properly. Acknowledgement of others works those have influential impact on determining the nature of the work in proper way forms the basis of any scientific communication and is included in the ethical consideration of publication.  Information obtained through private  conversation, correspondence or discussion  should be reported with the permission from the source.
Hazards and human or animal subjects
During the research work involvement of animals or human, the authors should ensure the compliances with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement to this effect. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants. The authors must clearly identify in the manuscript the involvement of hazards related to  chemicals, procedures or equipment.
Peer review
Research articles submitted  for consideration are first reviewed by editors/ editorial board member  in respective field. Up on satisfactory preliminary review by the editor/editorial board members, articles that are found suitable for review then sent to two experts in the field of the paper. Each and every article submitted for possible publication in the journal undergoes double blind peer review system; wherein identity of neither the authors nor the reviewers are disclosed. Reviewers are free to go through the content of the article without any prejudice or bindings; scientific content/procedure of the article remains the only criteria.
Ethically, authors are obliged to participate in the double blind peer review process and cooperate fully and promptly to editors’ requests for review compliances. The authors should comply to the reviewers’ comments/requirements systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal with in the stipulated deadline given.
Addressing fundamental errors in published works
Even after thorough proof checking, if the authors finds significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work, they should promptly intimate the same to the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum. If the editors or publisher notice otherwise that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.
B) Duties of Editors
Fair play and editorial independence
Consideration of the plagiarism checked articles followed by evaluation entirely on the basis of  scientific merit providing due importance to originality, importance, validity, clarity vis-à-vis relevance of the article to the journal’s scope is the primary duty of the Editorial Board. The decision on acceptance or rejection have no link to the origin of the article, authors’  race, gender, ethnic origin, religion, political belief or institutional affiliation etc. The Chief Editor has full authority over the timing of publication and on  the content of particular article or entire content of the journal.
The Chief Editors/Editors and editorial staff should refrain themselves from disclosing any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial advisers/the publisher etc..
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
The Chief Editors/members of the Editorial Board will refrain themselves from the decision making process  with respect to any  manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers. Chief Editor/Editors and editorial members/staff should refrain themselves from any  use of unpublished information in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes or any body else without the written consent from the authors. In the event of possibility of such cases the task should be handled by the another member of the editorial board as would be decided by the Chief Editor / Editorial Board. Chief Editor/Editors and editorial board members should not use privileged information or ideas obtained as a result of handling the manuscript for their personal advantage.
Publication decisions
The editorial board should ensure that all submitted manuscripts should undergo double-blind peer-review system by the experts in the respective field. The Chief Editor (may be in consultation with Editors) takes the  responsible for deciding the manuscripts submitted to the journal to be published, based on the importance, originality, validation of the work, the reviewers’ comments, conflict of interest status, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
The Chief Editors, Editors (in conjunction with the publisher and/or society) will take appropriate measures when ethical disputes are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published article. In this regard the guideline as provided in COPE Flowcharts is followed. Every dispute of unethical publishing behavior will be addressed, even if it is discovered years after publication.  In the event of establishment of unethical behavior on investigation steps to be taken are laid down in the latter paragraphs of this document.
C) Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer reviewing process is one of the most important stage towards publication of any scholarly article and  any suggestion in improving the process is always welcome. Unbiased, fear free, without having any prejudice are the main pillars of peer review system which helps in editorial decisions, the authors, and in the process helps in improving the quality of the manuscripts.
Importance of timely publication of research article for greater interest should be one of the directions of any scientific journal. Reviewers should cooperate to this direction and the reviewer who feels lack of expertise/qualification to evaluate the research reported in a manuscript or apprehends that its timely evaluation is not possible should immediately  intimate the corresponding editor and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewer could be contacted.
So long an article is published, its confidentiality is one of the important aspect and should be maintained at all levels during the processing of manuscript. Any manuscript received for review is confidential document and must be kept as such; it must not be displayed to or discussed with others unless and otherwise authorized by the Chief Editor. This publication ethics is also applicable to the reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Standards of objectivity
Objectivity and guidelines of the review for the journal form the basis of reviewing any article submitted for publication. Personal criticism of the authors is strictly prohibited. Reviews should be supplemented with supporting arguments such that authors can use these for improving the manuscript. In every comment there should be attempt to improve the quality of the article. 
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should examine and report the relevant published work that required to be cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Mismatching of cited work in the text and the works referred in review of literature should be matched. A reviewer should intimate the editor about the substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which he/she has personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Any potential reviewer, invited for reviewing article having  conflicts of interest as a result of competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions related to the manuscript and the work should immediately inform the concerned editor and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers could be contacted.
Reviewers should refrain themselves from using unpublished material in a submitted manuscript for his/her  own research without the written consent of the authors. This ethics is also applicable to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
D) Duties of the Publisher
Handling of unethical publishing behavior
All efforts are taken to discourage misconduct  against the publication ethics of the journal. In cases of alleged /intimated/notified or proven misconduct etc. against the publication ethics of the journal, the Chief Editor /the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate steps  to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This may include  publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work followed by notification in this regard.
Access to journal content
The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research.
Copyright: During submission of an article the authors should clearly surrender the copyright of the article, if published to the publisher i.e. the Society for Application of Statistics in Agriculture and Allied Sciences (SASAA).
Ownership and management: The Society for Application of Statistics in Agriculture and Allied Sciences (SASAA), with its Secretariat at the Department of Agricultural Statistics, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, post - Krishiviswavidyalaya, Mohanpur-741252, Nadia West Bengal, India is the publisher of the journal RASHI. The journal is under the guidance of an International Advisory Board and managed by its Editorial Board comprising of renowned experts from different disciplines of Agricultural Statistics and Allied Sciences. 
E) Dealing with unethical behavior
Detection of unethical behavior
The Chief Editor, at any point of time by the authors, the reviewers, the readers, the journal management, or any person be notified of any type of misconduct and unethical behavior. Misconduct and unethical behavior as outlined above, but need not be limited against the ethical standard and good practices to maintain the academic and publication sanctity is strictly dealt with. Enough conclusive information and evidences should be provided  in order to facilitate initiation of  an investigation. All allegations would be taken with utmost sicereity and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is arrived at.
The Chief Editor should initiate the investigation, may be in consultation with the Editors/ Editorial Board members, if he feels appropriate. Silent and evidential investigation should be carried out avoiding spreading any allegations before arriving at a conclusive decision.
The persons associated with the complaints should be consulted and before arriving at any measure against any complaint and should be allowed enough opportunity to defend against the allegation.
Depending upon the gravity of the misconduct, complaints would be dealt with utmost sincerity. In case of minor misconduct the corresponding persons against whom the complaint is, may be informed/educated/advised/cautioned. For serious misconducts varying measures like notifying a strong worded letter to the author or reviewer covering the misconduct and as a warning to future behavior, the employers of the accused be notified, publication of notification detailing the misconduct, a formal letter to the head of the author's or reviewer's department or funding agency, retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the journal, imposition of a formal embargo on contributions from an individual for a defined period and other measure that would be found suitable should be adopted.