Publication Ethics
The publication of articles in the National Journal of Computer Technology (JNASTEK) reviewed by colleagues who have the same field, is an important foundation in the development of a coherent and respected knowledge network. This is a direct reflection of the quality of the author's work and the institutions that support it. The articles reviewed will support and embody the scientific method. Therefore, it is important to agree on ethical standards that are expected for all parties involved in the act of publishing: Authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, publishers and the public.
CV. Hawari takes the duties of guardianship at all stages of publishing seriously and we recognize our ethics and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
Publication decision
The editor of the National Journal of Computer Technology (JNASTEK) is responsible for deciding which articles to submit to journals should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive such decisions. Editors may be guided by the discretion of the journal's editorial board and limited by legal requirements such as those currently in effect relating to defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Editors may negotiate with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
No discrimination
Editors evaluate manuscripts at all times for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality
Editors and any editorial staff may not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the relevant Authors, reviewers, prospective reviewers, other editorial advisors and publishers, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished material disclosed in submitted manuscripts may not be used in the editor's own research without the written consent of the Author.
Review assignment
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer reviews assist the editor in making editorial decisions and through editorial communication with the Author can also help the Author improve the paper.
Speed
Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in the manuscript or knows that a rapid review is not possible, must notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
Confidentiality
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They may not be displayed or discussed with others unless permitted by the editor.
Objectivity Standard
Review must be done objectively. Personal criticism of the Author is not true. Reviewers must express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Source Acknowledgment
Reviewers must identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the Author. Any statement that a previously reported observation, derivation, or argument must be accompanied by a relevant citation. The reviewer should also draw the attention of the editor if there are substantial similarities or overlaps between the text under consideration and other published papers of which he or she has personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Specific information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers may not consider manuscripts that have a conflict of interest as a result of competition, collaboration, or any other relationship or relationship with any of the Authors, the company or institution associated with the paper.
writer's assignment
Reporting standards
Authors of the original research report must present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be accurately represented in the paper. The paper must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable behavior.
Originality and Plagiarism
Authors must ensure that they have written a truly original work, and if Authors have used the work and/or words of others that have been cited or quoted correctly.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications
An Author should generally not publish text describing essentially the same research in more than one major journal or publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior.
Source Acknowledgment
Proper acknowledgment of the work of or
others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that were influential in determining the nature of the work reported.
Validity sheet
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, implementation, or interpretation of the reported research. All persons who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they must be recognized or listed as contributors. Appropriate authors must ensure that all co-authors are correct and that no inappropriate co-authors are listed on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of this paper and have agreed to submit it for publication.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
All Authors must disclose in their manuscripts any financial or other substantive conflicts that could be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their texts. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
Basic errors in published works
When an Author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in his published work, it is the Author's duty to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to withdraw or correct the paper.
