All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert ...referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Double-blind Single-anonymous: authors’ identities are known to the reviewers, reviewers’ identities are hidden from authors Double-anonymous: author and reviewer identities are hidden to each other Triple-blind: author and reviewer identities are hidden to each other, and from the Editor(s) Open: author and reviewer identities are known to each other • Describe criteria used by Reviewers when accepting/declining papers. Was there the opportunity to resubmit articles after revisions? Based on Experience and Qualification (professor, industrial person or Ph.D qualified) reviewers are identified. Based on the journal publication and previous reviewing experience, reviewers are selected. The review process is going to be according to: ○ Initially, all submitted papers will be checked for plagiarism using crosscheck iThenticate; ○ Papers will be classified based on their subject area by the technical team; ○ The technical head will pass the classified papers to the subject Experts; ○ The subject Experts will send each paper to at least three Reviewers for review after removing the Author’s information from the papers; ○ The papers will be accepted only if at least two Reviewers suggest the acceptation. • Conference submission management system: Easychair • Number of submissions received: 272 • Number of submissions sent for review: 258 • Number of submissions accepted: 83 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 30% • Average number of reviews per paper: 6 • Total number of reviewers involved: 120 • Any additional info on review process (ie plagiarism check system): IThenticate Plagiarism tool • Contact person for queries: Dr. S. Smys smys375@gmail.com
All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert ...referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Single-blind / Double-blind / Triple-blind / Open / Other Single-anonymous: authors’ identities are known to the reviewers, reviewers’ identities are hidden from authors Double-anonymous: author and reviewer identities are hidden to each other Triple-blind: author and reviewer identities are hidden to each other, and from the Editor(s) Open: author and reviewer identities are known to each other • Describe criteria used by Reviewers when accepting/declining papers. Was there the opportunity to resubmit articles after revisions? • Conference submission management system: • Number of submissions received: 37 • Number of submissions sent for review: 37 • Number of submissions accepted: 29 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 78 • Average number of reviews per paper: 23 • Total number of reviewers involved: 63 • Any additional info on review process (ie plagiarism check system): All articles were checked against plagiarism using ithenticate at the academy of the scientific research (ASRT-Egypt). The overall percentage was less than 20% • Contact person for queries: samaa@psas.bsu.edu.eg; mtaha@psas.bsu.edu.eg
All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert ...referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. * Type of peer review: Single-blind Single-anonymous: reviewers' identities are hidden from authors Criteria used: Originality, novelty, motivation, research quality, presentation quality, discussion, theme of the work, Authors had the opportunity to resubmit articles after revision. * Conference submission management system: Easy Chair and Direct mailing to conference secretary * Number of submissions received: 113 * Number of submissions sent for review: 21 (after presentation and shortlisting) * Number of submissions accepted: 21 * Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 21x100/113= 18.58% * Average number of reviews per paper: 3 * Total number of reviewers involved: 25 * Any additional info on review process: Plagiarism software has been used for identification of Plagiarism * Contact person for queries: Dr. A. K. Singh chair@icaiml.com, icaimlconf@gmail.com
All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert ...referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Double-blind • Describe criteria used by Reviewers when accepting/declining papers. Was there the opportunity to resubmit articles after revisions? YES • Conference submission management system: CONFBAY SYSTEM https://submit.confbay.com/conf/ncwe2020 • Number of submissions received: 81 • Number of submissions sent for review: 81 • Number of submissions accepted: 73 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 90% • Average number of reviews per paper: 3 • Total number of reviewers involved: 27 • Any additional info on review process (i.e. plagiarism check system): Plagiarism software (Turnitin) used to check similarity that would not be more than 30% including reference section. • Contact person for queries: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ramadhansyah Putra Jaya, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, (ramadhansyah@ump.edu.my)
All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert ...referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. ● Type of peer review: Double-blind review process ● Describe criteria used by Reviewers when accepting/declining papers. Was there the opportunity to resubmit articles after revisions? Acceptance/rejection’s recommendations by the reviewers were based on the mode of presentation and scientific/technical approach used in each paper. It was also based on the ability of the author(s) to revise their submitted papers based on the reviewer’s comments or by providing reasonable rebuttals to the comments raised by the reviewers. ● Conference submission management system: All papers were submitted via our email channel (icssd2020@covenantuniversity.edu.ng) ● Number of submissions received: 177 ● Number of submissions sent for review: 177 ● Number of submissions accepted: 109 ● Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 61.6% ● Average number of reviews per paper: 2 ● Total number of reviewers involved: 67 ● Any additional info on review process (ie plagiarism check system): The plagiarism of each paper was checked by Turnitin ● Contact person for queries: Dr. Theophilus A. Adagunodo, Department of Physics, Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria, theophilus.adagunodo@covenantuniversity.edu.ng
This open access textbook offers a practical guide into research ethics for undergraduate students in the social sciences. A step-by-step approach of the most viable issues, in-depth discussions of ...case histories and a variety of didactical tools will aid the student to grasp the issues at hand and help him or her develop strategies to deal with them. This book addresses problems and questions that any bachelor student in the social sciences should be aware of, including plagiarism, data fabrication and other types of fraud, data augmentation, various forms of research bias, but also peer pressure, issues with confidentiality and questions regarding conflicts of interest. Cheating, ‘free riding’, and broader issues that relate to the place of the social sciences in society are also included. The book concludes with a step-by-step approach designed to coach a student through a research application process.
According to the Romanian Law on copyright and neighbouring rights, official texts of a legislative or judicial nature and their official translations do not benefit from the legal copyright ...protection. On the other hand, the plagiarism is defined by the Romanian Law on good conduct in scientific research, technological development and innovation as being the exposition in a written work or in an oral communication, including in an electronic format, of some texts, expressions, ideas, demonstrations, data, hypothesis, theories, results or scientific methods extracted from written works, including in an electronic format, of other authors, without mentioning this thing and without referring to the original sources. As in the doctrine there is no convergent point of view regarding the possibility of plagiarism of the official texts of a legislative or judicial nature and their official translations, in this short article we intend to examine whether the lack of reference to the original sources could constitute or not a form of plagiarism in the current Romanian legal framework. We will argue that, de lege lata, we must distinguish between retrieving the official texts of a legislative nature, situation in which the reference to original sources is not mandatory, and retrieving extracts from jurisprudence, case in which it is necessary to mention this thing and to make reference to the original source.
PDF
