Publication Ethics

Peer review policy

All manuscripts submitted to VRU R&D J. Sci&Tech undergo an initial screening for completeness and compliance with the journal’s submission guidelines. Submissions that meet the basic requirements are assigned to a handling editor, who evaluates whether the manuscript is suitable for peer review. The journal adopts a double-blind peer review system, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous. Each manuscript is reviewed by at least three independent experts in the relevant field. If an editor is listed as an author on a manuscript or has a competing interest, the review process will be overseen by another qualified member of the Editorial Board. While editors consider the peer-reviewed reports when making decisions, the final editorial decision rests with the editors. Serious concerns raised by a single reviewer or the editor may be sufficient to reject a manuscript.

 

Guidelines for Ethical Publishing Practices

VRU R&D J. Sci&Tech is committed to ensuring that the publication of articles contributes to a reliable, transparent, and respected body of knowledge. Ethical publishing practices are essential to maintaining trust among authors, editors, peer reviewers, publishers, and institutions. These guidelines reflect our dedication to promoting honesty, integrity, and accountability throughout the publishing process. While they apply most directly to research articles, the same standards of ethical conduct are expected for all types of papers submitted to the journal.

 

Editor’s Duties in Maintaining Ethical Standards

Editors of VRU R&D J. Sci&Tech are responsible for upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and integrity. Their duties include:

• Originality and Integrity: Editors ensure that all published articles are the original work of the author(s) and are free from plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, or other forms of research misconduct. Submissions are routinely screened for similarity to maintain research integrity.
• Fair and Unbiased Submission Handling: All manuscripts are evaluated solely on their scholarly merit, regardless of the author’s race, gender, religion, nationality, or institutional affiliation. Decisions are based on the importance, originality, clarity, and validity of the work, and its relevance to the journal’s scope.
• Transparent Peer Review Process: The Editorial Team uses a standardized electronic submission and peer review system to ensure transparency, accountability, and traceability from submission to final decision.
• Appeals and Complaints: Editors have established clear and transparent procedures for handling appeals against editorial decisions and for addressing complaints, ensuring fairness and consistency in the publication process.

 

Confidentiality of Submissions

The Editorial Team of VRU R&D J. Sci&Tech is committed to maintaining the strict confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts. No information regarding a submission will be disclosed to any unauthorized individuals, including details about its status, editorial communications, reviewer invitations, decision letters, or revision requests.

Unpublished materials contained in a manuscript must not be used in the personal research of editors, reviewers, or staff without the express written consent of the author(s). Any privileged information or insights obtained through the peer review process must remain strictly confidential and must not be used for personal advantage or shared outside the review process.

Furthermore, to protect the integrity of confidential communications, no member of the Editorial Team may upload submission-related documents or correspondence into third-party tools, including AI-based platforms, for language editing or other purposes.

 

Peer Review

The Editorial Team of VRU R&D J. Sci&Tech is responsible for ensuring that the peer review process is conducted in a double-blind, fair, timely, and unbiased manner. Reviewers are carefully selected based on their academic qualifications, research expertise, and relevant experience. In addition, the journal is committed to promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion by considering appropriate representation in reviewer selection. The editors also evaluate potential conflicts of interest when assigning reviewers and carefully assess any reviewer recommendations for self-citations to ensure that they are academically justified and do not compromise the integrity of the review process.

 

Ethical Standards Compliance

The Editorial Team committed to ensuring that all published articles fully comply with the highest ethical standards. This includes strict adherence to principles of research integrity, the prevention of conflicts of interest, the protection of human and animal research participants, and the responsible use of data. All submissions are evaluated to confirm compliance with recognized ethical guidelines, and manuscripts that do not meet these standards will not be considered for publication.

 

Manuscript Rejection Policy

The Editorial Team can reject a manuscript at any stage of the submission process if the author(s) violates any of the author ethics listed below. The Editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making these decisions but will maintain the standards set out above.

 

The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Editorial Process
To maintain confidentiality, proprietary rights, and data privacy rights, no member of the Editorial Team shall upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into an AI tool. Moreover, because the true abilities of current AI models have not been empirically validated, they should not be used by any member of the Editorial Team in the evaluation or decision-making process of a manuscript. Ultimately, the Editor is solely responsible and accountable for the editorial process, the final decision, and any communications related to a submission.

 

AUTHOR(S)’S DUTIES IN MAINTAINING ETHICAL STANDARDS:
Authorship of the paper
Authorship should be limited to significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the submission. Conversely, individuals who have not contributed to the research should be acknowledged but not be listed as authors. Specifically, if there are others who have been involved in certain substantive aspects of the submission, such as unpaid language editing, they should be recognized in the acknowledgements section.

Authors must consider and agree upon the order of all authors and provide the definitive list at the time of the original submission. Only in exceptional circumstances will the Editor consider (at their discretion) the addition, deletion, or rearrangement of authors after the initial submission. All authors must agree with any such addition, deletion, or rearrangement.

The corresponding author is responsible for the inclusion all appropriate co-authors and acknowledgments. They are also responsible for ensuring that all co-authors have seen and approved the definitive version of the paper and have agreed to its submission to VRU R&D J. Sci&Tech.

Articles must be written in English and not include libelous or defamatory material.

Malpractice in Academic Authorship
VRU R&D J. Sci&Tech is committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity and ethics in academic publishing. Any form of malpractice in authorship is prohibited and will be addressed with utmost seriousness. Malpractice in academic authorship includes, but is not limited to, the following item:

Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that all submitted work is original and properly cites the work of others. Plagiarism in any form, including verbatim copying, paraphrasing without acknowledgment (including AI-generated content), and presenting someone else's work as one's own, is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors must properly cite and acknowledge the works of others used in their research and must not engage in any form of plagiarism. If your manuscript contains excerpts from other work, particularly Figures, Tables, literary extracts, etc., please contact the original authors/publishers before submitting the definitive version to seek permission to use their work.

Falsification and Fabrication: Authors must accurately present their research findings. Fabrication, which involves making up data or results, and falsification, which involves manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, or changing or omitting data or results, are serious offenses.

Duplicate Submission: Authors must not submit the same manuscript, in the same or different languages, to more than one journal concurrently. Duplicate submission is a breach of ethical standards.

Conflicts of Interest: Authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that might affect the interpretation of their results. This includes financial, personal, or professional relationships that could influence their research.

Research Ethics: If human or animal subjects are involved, authors must ensure that their research complies with ethical standards, including obtaining informed consent and institutional approval where necessary.

Correction of Errors: If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work, they must promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

VRU R&D J. Sci&Tech will take appropriate action, including retraction of published articles, in cases where malpractice is identified. Authors found to be in violation of these standards may be barred from future submissions to the journal.

The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies by Authors
VRU R&D J. Sci&Tech does not prohibit the use of AI tools in all instances, but there are limits and caveats to their use. If an author chooses to use generative AI and/or AI-assisted tools to draft their manuscript, their use should be limited to improving the readability of the manuscript only. This can include seeking guidance on language choices, paragraph organization, plain language usage, as well as the selection of keywords and informative headings. Authors should not use AI to generate text or ideas, paraphrase text, or analyze data. This is because (a) using generated content from AI would be a form of plagiarism, and (b) current AI models are prone to giving hallucinations, which are authoritative-sounding content that can be incorrect, incomplete, or biased. Because of these restrictions, the author(s) should not list AI and/or AI-assisted technologies as an author or co-author, nor cite AI as an author. Authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to and performed by humans. Thus, the author(s) should bear sole responsibility and accountability for the contents of their work.

If AI has been used in polishing the presentation of a manuscript, the author(s) should disclose this by including a statement in the declarations section of their published work.

The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Tools in Figures, Images, and Artwork
VRU R&D J. Sci&Tech does not permit the use of Generative AI or AI-assisted tools to alter figures, images, or artwork that were not created by the Author(s). This may include enhancing, obscuring, moving, removing, or introducing a specific feature within an image or figure.

Authors may include AI-generated figures if the AI is a part of the research design or research methods (such as in AI-assisted imaging approaches to generate or interpret research data, as in FMRI brain scans). In such cases, the author(s) must ensure replication of the figure by explaining what model or tool was used, how it was used, and ensure correct content attribution.

Authors may include AI-generated images or artwork only in instances where absolutely necessary, and only when they do not violate proprietary rights. Permission to use an AI-generated image or artwork will only be given by the journal editor and publisher, if the author(s) can demonstrate that all necessary rights have been cleared for the use of the material, that there is correct content attribution, and that the image or artwork contributes to the significance of the work.

REVIEWER’S DUTIES IN MAINTAINING ETHICAL STANDARDS:
Reviewers assist the Editorial Team in making decisions to accept, revise, or reject submissions. Through editorial communications, they should also help the author improve the paper, even when a rejection is recommended. Thus, reviewers are asked to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and to observe good reviewing etiquette.

Confidentiality: Reviewers must maintain confidentiality of the manuscript and must not disclose any information regarding the manuscript to persons outside the Editorial Team. Unpublished materials or information contained in the manuscript they are asked to review must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Fair and Unbiased Evaluation: Reviewers must provide a fair, unbiased, and constructive evaluation of the manuscript, without regard to individual opinions on issues such as race, religion, gender, sexuality, etc. Comments should be constructive and directed to matters of content and scientific rigor and not authorial voice or prescriptivist matters related to language choices (these are issues that the Editorial Team will comment on).

Conflict of Interest Disclosure: Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that may interfere with their ability to objectively review the manuscript.

Respect for Intellectual Property: Reviewers must respect the intellectual property of the author(s) and must not use any information from the manuscript for their own research without permission from the author(s).

The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Review Process
To maintain confidentiality, proprietary rights, and data privacy rights, a reviewer must not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into an AI tool. This directive extends to the peer review report, as it may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors, even if it is just for the purpose of improving language and readability. Moreover, because the true abilities of current AI models have not been empirically validated, they should not be used by the Reviewer in the evaluation or decision-making process of a manuscript. Ultimately, the Reviewer must be responsible and accountable for any comments, recommendations, and communications related to the review of a submission.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATION AND INVESTIGATION IN MANUSCRIPT PUBLICATION
When the journal receives complaints or suspects ethical misconduct, it conducts a thorough and fair investigation, following guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The investigation process includes the following steps:
• Appointing an investigation committee without conflicts of interest related to the manuscript.
• Using plagiarism detection software and carefully analyzing suspicious content to identify unethical behavior.
• Conducting a detailed assessment of the evidence to thoroughly examine the allegations.
• Giving the accused author a chance to respond to the allegations.
• Keeping the investigation confidential to ensure fairness for all parties involved.
• Taking appropriate action if misconduct is found, such as suspending or retracting the publication, in line with COPE guidelines. https://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct
• Informing all concerned parties of the results if the allegations are not substantiated.
• Monitoring and addressing misconduct complaints throughout the entire manuscript process, from submission to post-publication. If there are any concerns, the editor will consult with the editorial board for further action.