www.erpublications.com

Enhanced Research Publications

Enhancing the impact of Research

Applications are being invited for the post of BCA (Business Correspondent Agent) and Franchise Partners of ER Publications, India for any region from all over the World.....
YOU ARE HERE : Home > Publication Ethics

News

  • Science Central Scores

    Science Central Score for IJERSTE: 24.30 Science Central Score for IJERMCA:10.69

  • IC Value of IJERSTE

    IC value of IJERSTE: 5.47

  • Acceptance Rate 33.6 percent

    The average Acceptance Rate of ER Publications Journals throughout the year 2016 was 33.6 %. 

  • IJERSTE Impact Factor 4.059

    Its our pleasure to share with all the concerned people that Impact Factor has been updated for IJERSTE journal for the year 2016-2017. Now it is 4.059.

  • IJERMCA Impact Factor 3.578

    Its our pleasure to share with all the concerned authors/audience that Impact Factor has been updated for IJERMCA journal for the year 2017-2018. Now it is 3.578. ER Publication

  • IJERMDC Impact Factor 1.338

    ER Publications Journal IJERMDC Impact Factor has been updated l for the year 2016-2017. Now it is 1.338.

  • Thomson Reuters Indexed

    ER Publications journals have been indexed in Thomson Reuters Researcherid, Endnotes, Google Scholar, Europeana Libraries and many more national & International libraries.&n

View All

Open Access

Left Banner Open Access

Visitor Counter

Publication Ethics

 

 

 

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice – ER PUBLICATIONS

 

Hereunder are clearly spelt-out ethical behaviour that are expected from the Editor, Associate Editors, Editorial Board Members and Reviewers to our journals. These are to guide in keeping to the professional requirement in publishing and hence the extention of frontier of knowledge

 

 

Editor’s/Associate Editor’s spelt-out duties

 

  1.  Once the Editor/Associate Editor receives a manuscript, the same is reponsible for the first examination of the manuscript in terms of relevance and content. Based on this, the manuscript could be rejected outrightly or passed to reviewers for comments after assigning a number to the manuscript.
  2. The review reports of commnents provide guidance for the Editor to decide on the suitability or otherwise of the article under consideration; this will be in terms of acceptance or rejection of the same.
  3.  The journal operates a blind review in which both the reviewer and authors do not know each other. However in certain instances, the author(s)’ identity could be made known to the reviewer if the reviewer feells that thtis is need.
  4. The Editor maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript at all time.
  5. The Editor normally send the manuscript out to cometent reviewer who looks at the intellectual metrit of the same and provide comments.

 

Author(s) spelt-out duties

 

  1. The Author(s) must guarantee that the manuscript submitted to us has not be previously published or submitted elsewhere for publication. However, the author could submit the paper elsewhere if it is rejected by ER Publications Journals.
  2. There should be a guatrantee from the Authors that the work is original and approval of the affiliations of the Author(s) has been given to publish the paper, if needed. Also that all authors whose names appear in the manuscipt gave their concents to the inclusion of the names and the order in which the names have been presented for publication.
  3. Concerning experiments, the Authors should provide, if required more facts or data that may be asked for to authenicate the results being presented.
  4. Plagiarism is a serious offence, and authors must guarantee that the work does not contain any plagiarised material.

 

 

Editorial Board Member’s/Reviewer’s spelt-out duties

 

  1. It is the Reviewer’s duty to keep all information about the manuscript confidential at all times.
  2.  Relevant papers that are significant to the study may be suggested by the reviewer for the improvement of the manuscript.
  3. Reviewer needs to make sure that all sources of date used in the manuscript are duly referenced in the work. Thus, if a reviewer observes that these is similarity in the work being evaluated and another work that the Reviewer has read before, report should be made to the Editor.
  4. The review should be done professionally with a brief of what the study is about and stating the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript as well as the Reviewer’s opinion about the manuscript.
Right Join Reviewer
Right Join Reviewer Right Join Reviewer
Right Join Reviewer
Right Join Reviewer Right Join Reviewer

Follow Us On

Facebook

Twitter

Linked In

Google Plus

Copyright © 2012, ER PUBLICATIONS
All rights reserved.