Ethics Statement


  • Publication and Ethics Malpractice Statement

    The prevention of publication malpractice is one of the important responsibilities of the editorial board. Any kind of unethical behavior is not acceptable, and CJA does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. The following duties outlined for editors, authors, and reviewers are based on the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors and others scholarly journals. Editors, authors, and reviewers will also adhere to the following policies.

    1. Editorial responsibilities
    Editors should be responsible for everything published in the journal, strive to do: improve journal quality constantly to meet the needs of readers and authors; ensure the quality of the material they publish; champion freedom of expression; preclude business needs from compromising intellectual standards; always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed. Willing to help readers communicate to authors. To inform authors the peer-review suggestion. Respect peer-review opinion, protect creative enthusiasm of authors at the same time, when the review point of authors and review expert appear serious difference, invite over two experts to reexamine.
    Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article, editors should have no conflict of interest with respect to articles they reject/accept, only accept a paper when reasonably certain, when errors are found, promote publication of correction or retraction, preserve anonymity of reviewers.

    2.Author’s responsibilities
    Author’s article must be original works, no plagiarism; the data in article must be real and reliable, no fraudulence; if any errors was found, all authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes; citing outlook should mark out reference; forbid one paper for more than one journal; all authors in paper have significantly contributed to the research.

    3. Peer review experts responsibilities
    Valuation of Peer review experts for paper should be objective and just, the viewpoint error, intellectual mistakes, serious copy, suspected fake data are once discovered, should feedback to journal editorial department. Whether the paper reached publication criterion, clear opinion should be given. Review experts should have no conflict of interest with respect to articles research content. Review work is conducted under anonymity.

    4. Solving of academic misconduct
    In the course of edit and publication, follow academic misconduct problem may be come across: one paper for more than one journal; plagiarize others outcome; forge data.
    One paper for more than one journal is a mis-action taken by authors in order to publish paper sooner, it cause review experts and editors rehandling, resource waste and journal reputation descend, once discover, editors have right to search for the loss to authors.
    Plagiarizing others outcome and forging data are wrong conduct, authors are responsible for the consequences of this article. When the misconduct causes disputation and loss, the authors respond the charge of victim.
    Editors have a duty to act if they suspect misconduct, to ensure the integrity of the academic report. Whenever it is recognized that a significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distorted report has been published, it must be corrected promptly. If, after an appropriate investigation, an item proves to be fraudulent, it should be retracted. The retraction should be clearly identifiable to readers and indexing systems.