•  
  •  
 

Publication Ethics

The journal and its editorial board fully adhere to and comply with the policies and principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Duties of Editors

  1. Publication Decisions – Editors are responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal should be reviewed or published.
  2. Fair play – Editors should ensure the integrity of the publication review process. As such, editors should not reveal either the identity of the authors of manuscripts to the reviewers, or the identity of reviewers to the authors.
  3. Confidentiality – Editors must treat received manuscripts for review as confidential documents and must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
  4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest – Editors and any editorial staff must not use materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript (published or unpublished) for their own research without written authorization from the author(s).
  5. Investigations – Editors shall conduct proper and fair investigation into ethical complaints.

Duties of Reviewers

  1. Confidentiality - Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
  2. Standards of Objectivity - Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.
  3. Contribution to Editorial Decision - Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  4. Promptness - Reviewers should complete their reviews within a specified timeframe.
  5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest - Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors

Authors should prevent any publication that misrepresents research results and could erode the trust in AEBJ. Moreover, submitted research papers should not in any way undermine the professionalism of scientific authorship. All authors are requested to maintain the highest integrity standards regarding their research and its presentation. The following points represent good scientific practice and should be respected by all authors:

  • Submitted manuscripts must be the original work of the authors and their paper has not been submitted to other journals simultaneously. Moreover, identical or similar versions of the manuscript have not been published elsewhere before. This also applies to publications of the same manuscript in different languages.
  • Any conflict of interest must be declared upon submission to clarify upfront whether the paper can be transferred into the reviewing process. In this context, all authors of a manuscript have to disclose any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that may have influenced the results of their studies.
  • Submitting manuscripts to AEBJ implies that there is no infringement of existing copyright. With submission, all authors agree to acknowledge accurately and properly scientific sources and the work of others. Authors should be transparent if they want to re-use their own material in order to prevent self-plagiarism. If plagiarism becomes apparent during the review process, the manuscript risks being disqualified for further publication. If plagiarism is detected after the publication of the manuscript, AEBJ may publish a correction with the article; in severe cases, the editors will retract the paper.
  • AEBJ may use software to screen manuscripts for plagiarism.
  • Authors should present results clearly and comprehensively and refrain from fabrication, falsification or data manipulation of any kind.
  • Upon submission of the manuscript, authors have received written permission to use any material in the paper that was provided or created by third parties.
  • Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with manuscripts for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data if possible.
  • Authors must ensure that all relevant authors to the article, the corresponding author as well as the order of authors are identified and defined upon submission. There will be no changes of authorship after the acceptance of a manuscript.

By submitting an article to this journal you agree to comply with the following Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.

  1. Originality and plagiarism - All manuscripts must be the original work of the authors and must not show evidence of plagiarism.
  2. Authorship of the paper - Authorship of a manuscript should be limited to authors who have made significant contributions.
  3. Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publications - Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently.
  4. Acknowledgement of sources - Authors must properly and accurately acknowledge the work of others.
  5. Disclosure and conflicts of interest and financial support - authors should disclose any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript and acknowledge individuals or organizations that have provided financial support for research.
  6. Data access and retention - Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with manuscripts for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data if possible.

Peer Review Policy

It takes on average 4-6 weeks from the manuscript's initial submission to the Editor's first decision. AEBJ applies double-blind peer review following the below procedure:

  • Initial manuscript evaluation is undertaken by one of the editors-in-chief who decides whether submitted papers qualify for further review. Manuscripts that are rejected by the editor-in-chief suffer from serious scientific flaws; lack sufficient scientific originality; have poor grammar or English language or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Submissions that meet the minimum criteria are transferred to at least 2 reviewers who, whenever possible, have expertise in the relevant subject matter. Moreover, we try to involve, whenever possible, one editorial board member in the reviewing process. AEBJ adheres to double-blind reviewing, where both the reviewer and author remain anonymous throughout the process.
  • Reviewers evaluate submissions based on their originality, soundness of methodology, ethicality, clearly presented results, which support the conclusions; as well as correct referencing of relevant scholarly work. Reviewers may also suggest language and grammar corrections to the manuscript.
  • Should the reviewer’s reports fundamentally contradict each other, or reports are unnecessarily delayed, an additional reviewer will be involved in the process. The reviewers send the review report and their decisions back to the editor-in-chief, who will inform the author and share with him/her recommendations made by the referees.
  • Authors then have a certain period of time (defined by the editor-in-chief) to revise their manuscripts and resubmit them to the journal. Resubmission might be returned to the initial referees for re-evaluation. Reviewers may then accept the paper or request another revision, or they may reject the manuscript if not satisfied with the revision.
  • Reviewers advise the editor regarding the status of the paper and their evaluation as well as recommendations. It is the editor-in-chief who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the manuscript for publication.

Plagiarism

The journal enforces a strict anti-plagiarism policy, prohibiting the use of others' ideas, words, or work without proper acknowledgment. Submissions found to contain plagiarism in any form, including duplicate and redundant publications or self-plagiarism (regardless of language), will be rejected. Preprints are not considered duplicate publications. The corresponding author holds responsibility for the manuscript during the evaluation and publication process and has the authority to act on behalf of all co-authors. All submitted manuscripts undergo plagiarism checks using professional software, and any submissions with an unacceptable similarity index due to plagiarism will be rejected immediately.

Preprints Policy

Authors are free to share their preprints at any time and in any location. If a preprint is accepted for publication, the journal encourages authors to link the preprint to the formal publication using its Digital Object Identifier (DOI). Authors may also update their preprints on platforms such as arXiv or RePEc to include the accepted manuscript.

Special Issues

Special issue topics are determined by the editorial team of AEBJ and led by guest editors who are experts on the topics. Special Issue submissions follow the same process and author guidelines as any issue submission. Potential authors are encouraged to review all submission guidelines and follow the process as outlined. A call for submissions for special issues is typically included in the current year's special issue release.

Standards of Reporting

Research must be communicated in a manner that facilitates verification and reproducibility. Therefore, we encourage authors to provide thorough descriptions of their research rationale, protocols, methodologies, and analyses.

Use of Third-Party Material

It is essential to obtain the necessary permissions to reuse third-party materials in your article. This includes but is not limited to, text, illustrations, photographs, tables, data, audio, video, film stills, screenshots, or musical notation. The use of brief excerpts of text and certain other types of materials is generally permitted for purposes of criticism and review without formal permission. However, if you wish to include any copyrighted material not covered by this informal agreement, you must obtain written permission from the copyright owner before submission.

Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Writing

This policy pertains only to the writing process and does not cover the use of AI tools for analyzing data or generating insights during the research process.

GenAI tools cannot independently initiate original research without human guidance. They lack the ability to be held accountable for published work or research design, which are essential requirements for authorship, as outlined in these guidelines. Furthermore, they do not have legal standing or the capacity to hold or assign copyright. Therefore, in line with COPE’s position statement on Authorship and AI tools, these tools cannot serve as or be credited as authors of an article.

Authors incorporating AI and AI-assisted technologies into their writing should focus on enhancing readability and language, rather than replacing crucial authoring tasks such as generating scientific insights, drawing conclusions, or making clinical recommendations. The use of such technologies should always occur under human oversight, with all work carefully reviewed and edited. AI can produce content that may sound authoritative but can also be incorrect, incomplete, or biased, thus authors remain responsible for the content they create.

Authors are required to disclose their use of AI and AI-assisted technologies during the submission of their manuscripts. This transparency builds trust among authors, readers, reviewers, editors, and contributors, and ensures compliance with the terms of use for relevant tools or technologies.

Authors should not attribute authorship to AI or list AI as a co-author, as authorship involves responsibilities that can only be fulfilled by humans. Each author is responsible for addressing questions related to the accuracy or integrity of the work, approving the final version, and consenting to its submission. Authors must also ensure the originality of their work, confirm that all listed authors meet authorship criteria, and ensure that the work does not infringe upon the rights of third parties.