Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Logan Journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against publication malpractice.

Editorial Responsibilities

Fair Play and Impartiality

Editors evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study's validity, clarity) and their relevance to the journal's scope.

Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Author Responsibilities

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Ethical Violations

Handling Ethical Complaints

When ethical violations are found in a published manuscript, the journal will follow COPE guidelines in addressing the issue, which may include publication of a correction, retraction, or expression of concern.

Plagiarism Detection

All submitted manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using iThenticate software. Manuscripts with significant overlap with published works will be rejected.