Editorial Policies

At Scifiniti, our Editorial Policies are designed to uphold the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and fairness in the management of scholarly publishing. These policies establish the formal roles and responsibilities for authors, reviewers, and editors, guiding the structural stages of the publication process—from initial submission and rigorous peer review to final decision-making and post-publication record management.

In alignment with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), this section outlines our operational standards, including editorial independence, peer review workflows, conflict of interest management, copyright and licensing, and our advertising and marketing practices. To ensure accountability, these guidelines provide role-specific expectations that maintain a professional and unbiased environment for all editorial activities.

For our standards regarding research conduct and participant protection, please see our Ethical Oversight

I. Core Editorial Policies

1. Editorial Independence

At Scifiniti, we uphold the principle of full editorial independence. All decisions regarding manuscript acceptance, peer review, and publication are made solely by the Editor-in-Chief or an editor designated from the Editorial Board, without any influence from financial, commercial, or institutional interests. As a publisher, we do not interfere with editorial judgments, ensuring that content is evaluated and published strictly on the basis of scholarly merit, scientific rigor, and editorial excellence.

Scifiniti follows the guidelines set forth by COPE on editorial independence. To review COPE’s position statement, please see COPE Guidance on Editorial Independence

2. Peer Review Policy

At Scifiniti, we are committed to a rigorous, transparent, and unbiased peer review process. All manuscripts undergo evaluation by independent experts to ensure scientific quality, originality, and ethical compliance. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and are screened to avoid conflicts of interest with authors.

We uphold the principles of confidentiality, fairness, and timely evaluation throughout the review process. For detailed information about our peer review workflow, reviewer responsibilities, and standards, please see our Peer Review Process

3. AI Policy

3.1. AI Usage by Authors

Authors are permitted to use AI tools for manuscript preparation under strict conditions of accountability and transparency.

• Authorship: AI tools cannot be listed as authors.
• Disclosure: All AI assistance must be clearly disclosed in the manuscript.
• Integrity: Authors remain 100% responsible for the accuracy of AI-generated content and images.
• For the complete set of requirements, including image guidelines and declaration formats, please see our AI Usage in Manuscript Preparation on the Ethical Oversight

3.2. AI Use Policy for Reviewers

When Scifiniti invites a reviewer to review a manuscript, reviewers are required to maintain strict confidentiality. Manuscripts must never be shared with third parties or uploaded to any AI tools or external platforms, as this would violate the journal’s privacy policies, author confidentiality, and copyright regulations.

Reviewers are expected to assess the manuscript solely based on their expertise and judgment. If reviewers suspect any AI-generated content in the manuscript, they should contact the editorial office for guidance rather than analyzing the manuscript through external AI tools.

Limited use of AI tools is permitted only for preparing the reviewer’s own report, such as improving grammar, spelling, punctuation, or clarity. Under any circumstances, the manuscript itself must never be uploaded to any AI tool. Also, reviewers are recommended to disclose the use of AI (if used) in preparing the review when submitting the report. AI tools cannot be used to assess, interpret, or judge any part of the manuscript.

Reviewers are strongly encouraged to follow these guidelines strictly to preserve the integrity, confidentiality, and ethical standards of the peer review process.

3.3. AI Use Policy for Editors

Editors are entrusted with maintaining the highest standards of confidentiality, integrity, and professional judgment throughout the editorial process.

Editors are strictly prohibited from using AI tools to evaluate, assess, or make any editorial decisions regarding submitted manuscripts. All decisions ABOUT revision, acceptance, or rejection must be based solely on the editor’s independent expertise and professional judgment.

Manuscripts under consideration are confidential documents. Editors must not upload manuscripts, reviewer reports, or any portion of submission content to external AI tools or platforms, as doing so may breach confidentiality, copyright, and data protection obligations.

Limited use of AI tools may be permitted only for linguistic or administrative assistance, such as improving grammar, spelling, clarity, or formatting in editorial correspondence. AI tools must not influence or contribute to the scientific assessment, ethical evaluation, or decision-making process.

Editors may use AI tools that are officially provided or approved by Scifiniti, provided that such tools operate within the publisher’s secure environment and comply with confidentiality and data protection standards.

• Even when using publisher-approved AI tools:
• AI must not replace the editor’s independent judgment.
• Final decisions—including reviewer selection, requests for revision, acceptance, or rejection—must be made solely by the editor.
• AI outputs must be reviewed critically and not relied upon without human oversight.

Editors are strongly required to adhere strictly to this policy to preserve the integrity, confidentiality, and independence of the editorial process.

3.4. Use of AI and Automated Tools in Scifiniti Publishing

Scifiniti is committed to maintaining high standards of research integrity, confidentiality, and quality assurance. In support of these standards, we use carefully selected and secure tools within our publishing workflow.

3.4.1. Similarity and AI Content Screening

Scifiniti Publishing uses the Crossref Similarity Check service powered by iThenticate to screen submitted manuscripts for textual similarity. The same system is also used for AI-content detection functionalities available within iThenticate. These tools assist the editorial office in identifying potential overlap or AI-generated patterns; however, all reports are carefully reviewed and interpreted by qualified editorial staff.

If concerns arise regarding possible AI-generated images or undisclosed AI use, the authors will be informed and given an opportunity to respond and provide clarification before any further editorial action is taken.

3.4.2. Reviewer Selection Tools

Scifiniti utilizes reviewer recommendation tools integrated within our manuscript submission platform to support reviewer selection.

These tools provide suggestions based on subject relevance; however, reviewer expertise, academic credentials, publication record, and suitability are independently verified by the editorial team before assignment. Editorial judgment remains central to the reviewer selection process.

3.4.3. Language and Production Support

After final acceptance of a manuscript, Scifiniti Publishing may use language-support tools such as Grammarly to improve grammar, clarity, and readability. Language tools are used only to enhance linguistic quality and must not alter the scientific meaning of the content.

All suggested changes are carefully reviewed and monitored by our in-house production editors to ensure accuracy and preservation of the authors’ intended meaning. If any substantive edits are required, they are communicated to the authors for review and approval.

3.4.4. XML Conversion and Technical Processing

Scifiniti uses automated XML conversion tools during the production stage to facilitate indexing, archiving, and online publication formatting. These tools support technical structuring only and do not alter the scientific content of the manuscript.

Scifiniti ensures that all automated and AI-supported tools are used within secure environments and under strict editorial oversight. AI systems are employed solely to support efficiency and quality control, and they do not replace human editorial judgment or decision-making at any stage of the publishing process.

4. Open Access Policy

At Scifiniti, we uphold a strict open access policy, ensuring that all articles are accessible to a global readership as Gold Open Access under the Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license. This license allows copying, remixing, redistribution, and transformation of the material for both commercial and non-commercial purposes, provided proper attribution is given to the author, who retains copyright.

Publishing an article under an "Open Access" model entails the following:

• Readers are not required to pay any charge to publishers as articles are accessible without price barriers.
• Articles are published as Gold Open Access, immediately available without an embargo period.
• Anyone can use, reproduce, or distribute either a portion of the article without permission, provided that no substantive errors are introduced and proper credit is given to the original copyright holder, cited as a reference.
• After publication, the authors are free to share and publicize the article to their students or colleagues.  

Permissions

Scifiniti publishes all articles under a CC-BY license 4.0, allowing unrestricted use for commercial and non-commercial purposes. As a result, special permission is not required to reproduce the published materials. However, it is essential to note that some articles may contain figures or tables taken from the original copyright holder (publisher or authors). In such cases, permission must be obtained from the relevant publisher or author for the reproduction or reuse of these figures or tables. 

Article Processing Charges (APC)

Currently, authors are not charged, and all publications in our journals are completely free of cost. When Article Processing Charges (APCs) are introduced, they will apply only to new submissions, with advance notice provided to authors. Manuscripts already under review or in process at the time of APC implementation will continue to be published free of charge.

Advantages of Open Access Publishing

• Free Access: All articles are freely accessible, enhancing visibility.  
• Wider Accessibility and Visibility: Open-access publications are freely accessible to a broader audience without any subscription fees or pay-per-view charges. They also have a higher likelihood of being included in search engines and comprehensive indexing databases.
• Increased Visibility and Impact: Open-access articles often have greater visibility and more frequent citations, enhancing authors’ reputations and the impact of their work.
• Accelerated Research Progress: The open-access model accelerates the dissemination of research, allowing researchers to access and build upon the latest knowledge more quickly, potentially speeding up the research process.
• Adherence to Funders Mandate: Publishing in open access mode aligns with the requirements of many funders, ensuring policy compliance.

5. Copyright and Licensing

The copyrights of articles published in Scifiniti Publishing Journals are retained by the authors. Articles are published under the CC BY 4.0 license, allowing unrestricted use, reuse, and quotation of the article, provided proper attribution is given to the copyright holder and the original published version is cited. Any supplementary materials (datasets, videos, appendices, etc.) submitted with the article will also be made openly available under the CC BY license.

In cases where authors cannot retain their copyrights, such as government employees, the Editorial Office must be informed before publication, as modifications to the copyright statement cannot be made after the article is published.

Rights Granted to the Publisher

Upon acceptance and publication, authors grant the publisher the rights to:

• Distribute and share the article openly.
• Translate, adapt, or create derivative works.
• Include the article in collections, databases, or repositories managed by the publisher.
• Promote the article via social media, newsletters, press releases, or other channels to maximize reach and visibility.
• Enforce copyright and take legal action against unauthorized use.

Permission to Reproduce

If a manuscript includes material for which the authors do not hold the copyright, permission must be obtained from the copyright holder before the material can be reproduced in the article. Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to reproduce any copyrighted material that is not their original work.

In accordance with best practices in scholarly publishing and recommendations from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), authors must ensure that all reused materials comply with copyright regulations and that appropriate permissions and acknowledgments are obtained before publication.

Permission must be obtained from the copyright holder, usually the publisher or the original author, if the manuscript includes material for which the authors do not hold copyright, such as:

• Figures, tables, or images previously published in another journal, book, conference proceeding, report, or website.
• Illustrations, diagrams, maps, photographs, or graphical elements copyrighted by another author, publisher, or organization.
• Substantial excerpts of text from previously published sources.
• Content owned by third parties, including datasets or proprietary graphical materials.
• Material that is not covered by an open-access license permitting reuse.

Permission is generally not required in the following circumstances:

• The material is entirely original and created by the authors of the manuscript.
• The material is published under a Creative Commons license, such as the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which allows reuse provided that appropriate attribution to the original source is given.
• The material is in the public domain and therefore free to use.
• A figure or table has been fully redrawn or recreated by the authors based on previously published data, provided that the original source is properly cited.

Even when permission is not required, appropriate citation and acknowledgment of the original source must always be provided to maintain transparency and academic integrity.

6. Archiving Policy

Self-Archiving

All articles published by Scifiniti are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode). Under this license, authors retain copyright of their work while granting Scifiniti a license to publish the article, identify itself as the original publisher, and promote and disseminate the work through appropriate channels and platforms. The CC BY 4.0 license permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction, and adaptation of the work in any medium, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and the source.

Authors are free to share, distribute, and self-archive both the accepted manuscript and the final published version (Version of Record) on personal websites, institutional repositories, disciplinary repositories, or other open-access platforms. No embargo period applies, and articles may be archived immediately upon publication.

Self-archiving enhances the visibility, accessibility, and dissemination of research and may increase its potential for citation and impact. When depositing the article in repositories or other platforms, authors are encouraged to include a link to the version of record on the journal website to ensure proper attribution and maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

The published version of the article is available in [Journal name] under the DOI [DOI] at [URL].

Long-Term Archiving

For the long-term preservation and accessibility of published articles, Scifiniti has joined Portico, ensuring that all content remains securely archived and available for future reference.

7. Complaints and Appeals

Scifiniti Publishing is committed to maintaining the highest standards of editorial integrity, transparency, and ethical publishing. We recognize that authors, reviewers, and readers may occasionally have concerns regarding editorial decisions, the peer review process, publication ethics, or post-publication matters. These concerns may include appeals against manuscript rejection, complaints about editorial procedures such as delays or communication issues, and ethical issues such as authorship disputes, plagiarism, conflict of interest, data fabrication, or duplicate/redundant publication.

This Complaints and Appeals Policy provides a clear framework for raising and resolving such concerns in a fair, impartial, and timely manner. All complaints and appeals are handled confidentially, and every effort is made to ensure that the process follows internationally recognized ethical standards, including the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). 

7.1. Appeals Against Manuscript Rejection

Authors may appeal a manuscript rejection within 30 days of the decision. Appeals are evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief or an independent editor not involved in the original decision, taking into account reviewer comments, authors’ responses, and all relevant information.

The following are possible outcomes of an appeal against a manuscript rejection: 

• Keeping the original decision
• Reconsideration of the manuscript with or without additional peer review
• Invitation to submit a revised version addressing reviewer feedback 

7.2. Complaints About Editorial Processes

Concerns regarding editorial or peer review processes, including delays, communication issues, or workflow problems, are reviewed by the editorial team. Upon receipt, complaints are acknowledged and an investigation is conducted in a fair, impartial, and confidential manner. The editorial team may consult the Editor-in-Chief or other independent editorial staff as needed to ensure an unbiased review. Relevant information may be gathered from all parties involved, and steps are taken to address the issue appropriately.

The following are possible outcomes of complaints about editorial processes:

• An explanation of the cause of delays, miscommunication, or workflow issues
• Adjustments to internal editorial procedures to prevent recurrence
• Direct resolution of specific concerns raised by the complainant

7.3. Complaints About Publication Ethics

Publication ethics complaints cover issues such as:

• Authorship disputes, including addition, removal, or order of authors, which must comply with the journal’s authorship policy and require agreement from all authors. [See Scifiniti Publishing Authorship Policy]
• Plagiarism, including substantial reuse of previously published text without proper citation or permission. Minor overlap in methods or background sections may be acceptable if clearly referenced. [See Plagiarism Policy]
• Conflict of interest, where undeclared financial or personal interests may affect the integrity of the research. [See COI Policy]
• Data fabrication or falsification, including manipulation or invention of research data. [See Research Integrity Policy]
• Redundant or duplicate publication, including simultaneous submission or republishing the same or substantially similar work without disclosure. [See Redundant / Duplicate Publication Policy]

All ethical complaints are handled in accordance with COPE guidance. The editorial office may contact authors or other relevant parties for clarification and will determine whether the manuscript can proceed or should be rejected.

Possible outcomes:

• Dismissal of unsubstantiated concerns
• Issuance of a correction, expression of concern, or retraction
• Notification to involved parties about ethical findings
• Escalation to external authorities if required

7.4. Vexatious or Repeated Complaints

Complaints that are deemed vexatious—submitted primarily with the intent to harass, intimidate, or unduly burden the editorial office—may be dismissed at the discretion of the editorial team. Additionally, repeated complaints concerning the same matter, without the provision of new evidence or relevant information, may not be considered.

7.5. Post-Publication Concerns

If issues are identified after publication, corrective actions may include:

• Issuing a correction, expression of concern, or retraction
• Notification to involved parties about ethical findings
• Escalation to external authorities if required

All post-publication cases are handled in accordance with COPE guidelines. Linking these processes to COPE ensures transparency and aligns the journal with internationally recognized ethical standards.

Transparency and Safeguards
To ensure impartiality, the editor responsible for the original decision will not be involved in handling appeals related to that decision. The editorial office maintains records of all complaints and appeals for audit and continuous improvement purposes. All processes are conducted in accordance with established ethical practices to ensure fairness, integrity, and consistency.

Timelines

• Acknowledgment of complaints or appeals: within 5–7 working days
• Resolution of complaints or appeals: typically, within 4–8 weeks, depending on complexity
• Only one appeal per decision is permitted; subsequent appeals must present new and relevant information
  Decisions following an appeal are considered final.

Complaints or appeals should be submitted in writing to the Editorial Office at info@scifiniti.com The email should include: 

• Your name and contact information
• The manuscript title and reference number (if applicable)
• A clear description of the issue or decision being appealed
• Supporting evidence or documentation
  Anonymous complaints are accepted; however, providing contact information allows the editorial office to request clarification if needed.

8. Post-Publication Corrections

For post-publication corrections, errors or inaccuracies discovered after publication will be promptly addressed to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record. Post-publication updates may include errata, corrigenda, retractions, withdrawals, editor’s notes, or editorial expressions of concern, depending on the issue. The corresponding author should contact the editorial office with a detailed explanation of the error, and corrections will be made following COPE guidelines.

8.1. Erratum

An erratum is published when a manuscript contains minor errors that do not involve ethical concerns and do not affect the overall integrity or conclusions of the article. These are typically errors introduced during editing or production and may be identified by the publisher, authors, or readers after publication. A DOI will be assigned to the erratum, which will be linked to the original article, along with a publisher’s note explaining the correction.

8.2. Corrigendum

A corrigendum is published when an author identifies an error in their article after publication. The author should prepare a note describing the error, which must be signed and confirmed by all co-authors. A DOI will be assigned to the corrigendum, linking it to the original article.

A corrigendum is appropriate only for errors that do not invalidate the main results or conclusions of the article. Errors affecting the validity of the study require alternative corrective actions, such as retraction.

8.3. Article withdrawal

Authors may request the withdrawal of a manuscript prior to its acceptance for publication. However, withdrawal after acceptance or publication is strongly discouraged and permitted only for compelling, integrity‑related reasons such as ethical concerns (e.g., errors affecting validity, authorship disputes, plagiarism, or other serious issues). Withdrawal requests must be supported by a clear explanation of the reason and approved by the Publisher.

In addition to author-initiated withdrawals, the journal reserves the right to issue a withdrawal if the Editorial Office identifies substantial concerns at the pre-publication or Early Access stage that could compromise the integrity of the manuscript. In such cases, a formal post-publication withdrawal notice will be issued to ensure transparency and maintain the scholarly record.

If a DOI has already been assigned and the manuscript is published online as an Early Access article (or similar), the article’s content (PDF and HTML) will not simply be removed. Instead:

The original article files will be replaced with a formal withdrawal notice that clearly explains the reason for withdrawal.

The DOI will remain active and will redirect to the withdrawal notice page.

This approach aligns with international publishing best practices and ensures the integrity and permanence of the scholarly record while transparently documenting reasons for withdrawal.

8.4. Retraction

In cases where a published article is found to contain serious ethical issues, data fabrication, or other forms of misconduct, a retraction may be necessary to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record. Retractions can be initiated by the authors, editors, or the Publisher. Author-initiated retractions typically occur when authors identify significant errors that invalidate the main conclusions of the work or involve honest mistakes that cannot be corrected through a corrigendum. Editor- or publisher-initiated retractions generally occur in response to misconduct, ethical violations, plagiarism, or falsified data.

The retraction process follows COPE guidelines, and authors are allowed to respond before the retraction is finalized. Retracted articles are clearly marked, and a link to the retraction notice is provided, ensuring transparency while preserving the integrity and traceability of the scholarly record.

8.5. Editor’s Notes

Editor's Notes are published under circumstances that do not call for a retraction, correction, or expression of concern.

These notes draw attention to aspects of a published article that do not influence its results or conclusions, but where editors believe it is appropriate to recommend that readers exercise caution in interpreting the article's content. An Editor's Note is an online-only update, appearing only in the HTML version of the article, and is not indexed.

An Editor’s Note may be warranted, for example, when:

• Unethical behavior during the review process has prompted the author(s) to make a change/addition that they would not have made otherwise (for example, the addition of unnecessary citations). Still, the changes have no impact on the article's results or conclusions, and there are no other indications of misconduct.
• The final result of a resolved concern or complaint does not justify (or is no longer justifying) an expression of concern, correction, or retraction.
• There is an unresolved or unresolvable authorship dispute, but there is no reason to doubt the validity of the article's findings, data, or content.

8.6. Editorial Expressions of Concern

An Editorial Expression of Concern (EEoC) is an official notice released by journal editors to inform readers about potential problems or uncertainties that could affect the credibility or ethical soundness of a published paper. Following the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, an EEoC may be issued when:

• There is inconclusive evidence of potential misconduct.
• There is reason to doubt the reliability of the findings, but an institutional investigation is not being conducted or is not possible.
• An investigation is underway, but is expected to take a long time.
• Concerns exist about the fairness/independence of an inquiry

Editorial Expressions of Concern (EEoCs) are published online, connected both ways to the original publication, and provided with their own Digital Object Identifier (DOI). If new information emerges, it could be replaced with a correction, retraction, or clarifying statement, depending on the results of the review. These notices are typically indexed in databases where the journal is listed.

Editor’s Notes and Editorial Expressions of Concern are generally—though not in every instance—replaced by another type of editorial update, such as a correction or a retraction, after the completion of an investigation. While an Editorial Expression of Concern remains a lasting component of the scholarly record, it can be modified or supplemented to incorporate the conclusions once the inquiry has reached its conclusion. 

9. Citation Policy

Authors are expected to follow the COPE Citation Policy while citing any article in their manuscripts. Citations manipulation by authors, reviewers and editors is strictly prohibited. 

9.1. Author's Self-Citation

Authors should avoid artificially inflating their citations by including an excessive number of their own articles or those of colleagues and friends. Nonetheless, if an author is referencing their previously published work, which is relevant, it is essential to provide a proper citation to prevent potential issues of self-plagiarism or redundancy.

9.2. Journal's Self-Citations

Authors are advised against extensively citing articles published in the same journal where they intend to publish their own work.

Editors and reviewers are strongly encouraged to refrain from suggesting irrelevant articles to authors as a means to boost their own or the journal’s citation counts.

10. Author Copies and Reprints

 Scifiniti provides authors with a digital PDF of their published articles, which can be easily shared with colleagues, institutions, or online platforms. 

We do not offer physical reprints as part of our standard publishing services. This approach supports open access, broad digital dissemination, and sustainability. Authors can use the PDF and DOI link to distribute their work. For special requests regarding printed copies, please contact the journal office for guidance.

11. Advertising Policy

Scifiniti Publishing does not host any advertisements on its journals or website, ensuring that all editorial decisions remain fully independent and unbiased. Our focus is solely on the integrity and quality of scholarly content. Should advertising be introduced in the future, it will be clearly distinguished from editorial material, comply with ethical standards, and never influence peer review or publication decisions.

12. Marketing and Promotion Policy

• Scifiniti Publishing conducts all invitations to submit manuscripts, contribute to special issues, or serve as guest editors in an ethical, professional, and transparent manner.
• Editorial board members, reviewers, and authors may be invited to contribute their own research, assist in collating submissions, or recommend colleagues to submit their papers. All such involvement is voluntary, transparent, and free from undue influence.
• Outreach activities are carefully targeted to researchers and professionals whose work aligns with the journal’s scope, ensuring relevance and avoiding unsolicited, excessive, or misleading messages.
• Calls for papers for regular and special issues are published on the journal website and shared through social media and other professional channels, providing clear, accurate information and allowing recipients complete freedom to decide whether to participate.
• Editors may use their professional networks to inform potential contributors about submission opportunities, ensuring all communications are truthful and transparent.
• Scifiniti Publishing organizes and participates in webinars, conferences, and other academic events to share information about journals, calls for papers, and published research, fostering professional engagement while maintaining ethical standards. Participants of these events may also be invited to submit or contribute papers.
• After publication, articles are promoted responsibly through journal websites, academic platforms such as ResearchGate, social media, newsletters, webinars, conferences, and other professional channels to increase visibility and highlight research contributions. Our collaboration with ResearchGate via journal home pages ensures that the full-text versions of articles are easily accessible to the research community, further supporting their dissemination and impact.  

All communications, whether before or after publication, are unobtrusive, professional, and informative, reflecting Scifiniti Publishing's commitment to ethical publishing and full compliance with publishing best practices suggested by Committee on Publication Ethics.

II. Duties of Editors

1. Peer Review Process

The fairness, impartiality, and transparency of the peer review process are paramount responsibilities of editors. Editors are tasked with ensuring that selected reviewers possess relevant expertise in the article's topic and do not have any conflicts of interest with the authors. Furthermore, editors should scrutinize reviewers' suggestions for adding references, ensuring that reviewers do not recommend their own work unless it is pertinent to the manuscript. This meticulous assessment is essential for identifying and addressing potential sources of bias in the peer review process.

2. Conflict of Interest

Editors have a critical responsibility to guarantee the absence of conflicts of interest among reviewers and authors, a fundamental requirement for maintaining a transparent and unbiased peer review process. In instances where editors themselves hold a conflict of interest with the authors, they should not involve themselves in the review and decision-making processes. In such situations, editors are recommended to assign an alternative board member to manage the peer review process and make the final decision.

3. Impartial Editorial Judgement

The Editor-in-Chief holds the responsibility of making unbiased decisions regarding manuscript publication and the appointment of Editorial Board members. These decisions should be made without regard to factors such as race, gender, sexual orientation, religious convictions, ethnic heritage, citizenship, or political affiliations. The Editor-in-Chief must appoint Editorial Board members from diverse regions. The Editorial office is committed to providing comprehensive support and guidelines to establish a transparent appeal process against decisions, reaffirming the journal's unwavering dedication to principles of fairness and accountability.

4. Ethical Standards

Editors hold the ethical responsibility of safeguarding the integrity of published work. This involves vigilant monitoring to detect issues related to plagiarism, data fabrication, and other forms of ethical misconduct, whether through the use of plagiarism detection tools or expert judgment by our Advisory Board members. Editors enforce the publication's ethical guidelines for both authors and reviewers, ensuring adherence to standards for authorship, data presentation, and citations. Additionally, they are entrusted with managing potential conflicts of interest by requiring full disclosure and transparent resolution when conflicts arise. When ethical violations are found after publication, editors are advised to take immediate action, such as issuing retractions or corrections, and communicate these actions transparently to readers.

5. Unethical Citations Increase

An editor must refrain from any endeavour to artificially boost the journal's metrics to enhance its ranking. Upholding ethical principles is the primary responsibility of an editor. Editors should not add any references to the journal's articles unless their inclusion is necessary for the article. Furthermore, authors mustn't be forced into incorporating citations of the editor's own work.

6. Confidentiality

Editors are entrusted with the duty to maintain the privacy of submitted manuscripts, safeguard authors' intellectual property rights, and ensure that unpublished research findings are not disclosed or misused. This involves keeping manuscripts confidential, instructing peer reviewers on the importance of discretion, and restricting access to submitted content. COPE provides comprehensive guidelines that emphasize the duty of confidentiality for editors and reviewers, secure data and material storage, transparency in data sharing, and the importance of peer reviewers upholding confidentiality.

7. AI Tool and Editors’ Responsibilities

Editors should avoid using AI or AI-assisted technologies in the decision-making stages of a manuscript. This is due to the fact that the discernment, critical analysis, and original evaluation required for such tasks lie beyond the capabilities of this technology. There exists a notable risk that the application of AI tools may lead to the generation of inaccurate, incomplete, or potentially biased conclusions regarding the manuscript.

The editorial process, the ultimate decision, and subsequent communication with the authors are the responsibility of the editor. By adhering to these principles, editors safeguard the integrity of the editorial process and maintain the trust of authors and readers alike.

8. Post-Publication Monitoring

Post-publication monitoring is a vital responsibility for editors, involving the continuous and systematic review of all published articles to detect misconduct, such as plagiarism. When such issues are identified, editors are required to take proactive action as per the guidelines of COPE, working collaboratively with authors to make necessary corrections, updates, or retractions to rectify the problems. Equally essential is transparent communication with the journal's readers and the broader academic community, ensuring that corrections and updates are disclosed promptly and accurately.

III. Duties of Reviewers

1. Impartiality and Objectivity

Peer review is the foundation of quality publication; reviewers are therefore expected to rigorously maintain the principles of impartiality while reviewing any manuscript. The principle of impartiality and objectivity is an important aspect of the ethical duties of reviewers in the peer review process. It is strongly recommended that reviewers conduct the peer review process in an unbiased and transparent manner. Here's a more detailed elaboration of this principle:

2. Evaluation Based on Scientific Merit

Reviewers are expected to assess manuscripts solely based on their scientific quality, originality, and significance without considering authors’ identity, affiliation, personal beliefs, etc.

3. Avoiding Conflicts of Interest

While the editorial office takes care to ensure that reviewers assigned to manuscripts are neutral and free from conflicts of interest with any of the authors, reviewers must remain vigilant. If reviewers come across any manuscripts for review where they suspect a potential conflict of interest, they should promptly inform the Editorial Office. This proactive communication will allow for the prompt assignment of an alternate reviewer, ensuring the integrity of the peer review process.

4. Confidentiality

We require our reviewers to uphold the confidentiality of manuscripts and to refrain from disclosing any manuscript details to third parties. If reviewers wish to collaborate with another reviewer on a manuscript, they must first inform the editorial office. This allows us to verify the credentials of the co-reviewers and assess the potential for conflicts of interest.

Reviewers are also obligated not to incorporate any unpublished materials, data, or concepts from the manuscripts they review into their own forthcoming work without obtaining written consent from the original authors.

5. Use of AI Tools in Peer Review Process

At Scifiniti, our peer reviewers are advised against utilising AI tools during the peer review process. We place a strong emphasis on our reviewers' responsibility to safeguard the integrity of authors' publications. Accordingly, we request that our reviewers refrain from using AI tools to assess manuscripts, as this may potentially compromise authors' rights to maintain the confidentiality and proprietary nature of their work. The use of AI tools is strictly prohibited, not only for the evaluation of scientific quality but also for the improvement of language and readability.

AI tools have limitations, particularly in their capacity to evaluate originality, novelty, and the overall quality of a manuscript. These aspects require the unique perspectives, original evaluations, and critical thinking abilities of human reviewers, which fall beyond the capabilities of AI technology. As such, there is an inherent risk of incorrect assessment when relying solely on AI tools.

Therefore, we ask our reviewers to accept manuscripts for review only when they believe they can provide a comprehensive evaluation based on their expertise and the manuscript's content.

6. Timeliness

Reviewers are encouraged to accept manuscript review requests only when they can commit to timely completion. If reviewers anticipate needing additional time, they should promptly communicate with the editorial office. Extended deadlines can have a significant impact on the publication process; therefore, the editorial office may need to reach out to other reviewers in the event of prolonged delays.

7. Plagiarism and Originality

Reviewers are expected to promptly notify the editorial office if they encounter instances of plagiarism in the manuscripts they are reviewing. They should refrain from conducting further reviews and await guidance from the editorial office.

8. Ethical Concerns

Reviewers should be vigilant for ethical concerns in the manuscript, such as data fabrication, unethical experimentation, image manipulation, or violations of research ethics. They are advised to immediately inform the editorial office about any such concerns. They are advised to follow the ethical guidelines of the journal and any applicable ethical standards in the field, such as those outlined in the COPE guidelines.