The publisher "Welfare Universe' has set their own developed in-house policies for "Publication ethics and & Malpractice Statement regarding the best practices and the Journal or publisher both are committed to do best practices and additionally follows publishing standards set by the this journal follows the guidlines set by the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers In Addition, as a Journal follows International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE; www.icmje.org) (it is expected of authors, reviewers and editors that they follow the best-practice guidelines on ethical behaviour contained therein) and follows the rules setup by ELSEVIER The Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK) is an online resource to support journal editors in handling publishing ethics allegations, regarding publication ethics and as a publisher WELFARE UNIVERSE is committed to upholding scholarly publication ethics through every possible manner and every possible efforts. We try to adhere to the norms and guidelines formulated by various scholarly societies to achieve international standards by maintaining quality in publication and by updating our publication system. We expect and encourage all the concerned parties associated with the journal to follow the norms as mentioned in our website.
All published materials—articles, book reviews, poems or art pieces, must contain appropriate attribution of authorship. Since we follow the online medium, it is the sole responsibility of the corresponding author—who initiates the submission process online, to ensure integrity of publication ethics by complying with the following and Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.
Appropriate attribution and acknowledgement
The corresponding author should ensure
Changes in authorship
Authors can send request for changes to authorship to the Chief Editor of the Journal before Publication final Version. The Chief Editor of the journal reserves the right to take final decision on the request. Changes will be made only if there is valid reason and full agreement among the authors. Public notification may be made in the case of any post-publication change.
Ghost,’ ‘guest,’ or ‘gift’ authorship
We condemn the unethical practice of ‘Ghost,’ ‘guest,’ or ‘gift’ authorship (or anything that does not have any proper contribution to an article) and take appropriate steps against such practices.
WELFARE UNIVERSE wants all concerned with publication of the journals and magazines—editors, reviewers and website managers, to strictly follow international norms. We are constantly trying making every possible effort to raise the standards of our publications. We expect the same kind of commitment from authors to conform to the ethical norms by following our guidelines.
While submitting with our journals and magazines authors should strictly follow our guidelines. We reserve the right to take action against any of the practices mentioned blow:
We accept manuscripts on the belief that the same has not been submitted or will be submitted with other journals while the review process is going on. Concrete action is taken against the authors who make simultaneous submission during the period of peer review.
Plagiarism is a curse upon the scholarly world. Authors submitting with us are expected to have proper understanding about the plagiarism issues. Nothing should be copied in any form without proper acknowledgement or legal permission in any way that may violate other’s rights. While they should include acknowledgement to other’s works, they should also take permission for using any material from the concerned parties themselves. The journal will not initiate any process nor will remain responsible for any kind of copyright violation.
We do not expect authors to include anything that may turn out to be defamatory or promotional.
Steps against Misconduct
We may take any one or all of the following steps against unethical practices:
Conflict of Interest
In order to maintain transparency in publication, we encourage all—authors, editors, reviewers and other person/parties involved in the publication process, to avoid any form of conflicts of interest. Our publication policies and guidelines are regularly revised to address the issues.
Authors with our journals and magazines need to be careful of any kind of conflict of interest—be it financial, promotional or honorary. The corresponding author is responsible for sending us the Conflict of Interest document agreed to and signed by other authors.
Editors and reviewers of our journals and magazines are encouraged to avoid any form of potential conflict of interest while performing their duties in concerned capacities in order to maintain integrity of our publication ethics and raise the standard of the journal. They are requested to follow the guidelines sent to them in the form of email communication. All forms of internal conflicts of interest are handled by the Chief Editor, who maintains privacy and takes appropriate measure.
The professional independence of the editorial board members is strictly maintained by the publisher. The board enjoys full autonomy in performing their scholarly duties. The publisher does not interfere with anything regarding this.
Duties of Editors
Fair play and editorial independence
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering 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; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.
The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
Editors (in conjunction with the publisher and/or society) will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. AP-SMART editors follow the COPE Flowcharts when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct. If, on investigation, the ethical concern is well-founded, a correction, retraction, expression of concern or other note as may be relevant, will be published in the journal.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavour. AP-SMART shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to the scientific process have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been 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. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
“Research Ambition” DOES NOT endorse any product or service marked as an advertisement or promoted by a sponsor in publications. Editorial content is not compromised by commercial or financial interests, or by any specific arrangements with advertising clients or sponsors. The editorial board of the journal does not accept for consideration and does not print advertising articles (both on a reimbursable and free basis).
“Research Ambition” is a self-financed open access journal, which is published in online version. This Journal does not charge any APC or FEE, Hidden Fee, Copy Edit or other fee from authors. Journal is wholly maintained with Volunteer effort(s) who are come/belongs from different Institutions/Universities.
Research Ambition Journal DOES NOT carry out any direct marketing like Direct Mail, Telemarketing, Direct Response Advertising to authors, or calls for papers. Journal does not use any direct marketing consists of promotion, communications activity sent directly to authors or companies to submit any articles to journal issues. It’s important to note that not all marketing is good marketing especially for research journals direct marketing techniques contain negative elements that impact the global authentic research field. Journal believes in authentic research and publication with a double-blind peer-reviewed process. Journal does not request manuscripts through commercial means. The authors who decide to publish in the Journal do so motivated by its quality, content and availability in open access format through the homepage of both, or other open access media.
Duties of Authors
Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, while editorial 'opinion' or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Data access and retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data centre), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.
Originality and plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication
Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable.
The publication of some kinds of articles (such as clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Authors should—at the earliest stage possible (generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript)—disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers’ bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if any).
Acknowledgement of sources
Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.
Hazards and human or animal subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance 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 privacy rights of human participants must always be observed.
Duties of the Publisher
Handling of unethical publishing behaviour
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.
Access to journal content
The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our own digital archive. For details on Elsevier’s archiving policy, please click here: https://www.elsevier.com/about/company-information/policies/digital-archive.
Complaint handling Committee(CHC)/Complaint Management System
Research ambition Journal always make sure to adopt a good academic procedure and dealing with the received complaint(s) to the Journal/Publisher level committee which is called “Complaint handling Committee(CHC)” aforementioned committee shall consist a knowledgeable person(s)/member who has knowledge to deal with such complaint(s)/or request. Or has a member of academic institution or has been or has a Dean/Professor/Assistant Professor/Associate Professor or hold(s) any academic post in any institution or university. Such requested complaint shall be called “Direct Complaint” for dealing/handling purpose(s) at the end of the committee and the person who made complaint or request or grievance shall be deemed to be the “request maker” for all purpose(s) herein mentioned.
“Direct Complaint” may be requested at: email@example.com
After expiry of 30 Day(s) “The Request maker” if feels unsatisfied may address the “Appeal” to the “Appellate Authority” by mentioning in subject line “Appeal for Complaint handling Committee(CHC)” to firstname.lastname@example.org Such appeal shall be dealt by the “Editor Chief of the Journal” and Editor Chief of the Journal at any stage or at any point of time it appears that such request shall be dealt by the mentioned authority may by suo moto call or deal with such request before coming to the appeal.
Peer Review System
We review the submitted works following Double Blind Peer Review. We promise to conceal always the identity of both the reviewers and the author from both the parties. Primarily the submitted articles are considered by us for the confirmation of the standard and the scope of the magazine. If any submitted article fails to fulfill primary standard, the same is rejected and the decision is communicated to the author promptly. If the editors are satisfied, they will select two or more reviewers for detailed consideration of the piece or submission In case of disagreement between reviewers, the matter is resolved by the Chief Editor.
Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India
Head office: email@example.com
Contact: +91-9755599942 (INDIA)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.