Our Open Access Policy means that the authors grant the ZEAL PUBLISHER a comprehensive and unalterable right to distribute their published scholarly articles for any non-commercial purpose. All articles published in ZEAL open access journals are peer reviewed and upon acceptance will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. This permits anyone to copy, distribute, transmit and adapt the work, provided that the original source is appropriately cited.
Zeal Press values your personal information and protecting your privacy throughout our relationship remains our priority. During the submission process we require your name, e-mail address, current institution or organization affiliation, designation or any other relevant information such as your area of expertise, postal address, and contact number etc. However, we make sure that your information will not be disclosed to any irrelevant contact other than the editor, reviewers (only if required) or other staff related to the publication process of your submission.
Also the manuscripts submitted to us are treated as confidential documents and neither shown nor discussed with others, except as authorized by the Editor in Chief.
Zeal Press highly condemns and never accepts plagiarism in any sort of submission to its journals.
This unethical practice includes but is not limited to the:
- Deliberate copying and presenting someone else work word for word, wholly or partly, without permission and due acknowledgment of the original source.
- Though not copying word for word but, reproducing others’ ideas without prior permission or original source acknowledgment; the practice of paraphrasing.
- Text-recycling Reproducing some portions of own work and submitting it as a new publication without properly citing the previous work falls in the definition of Text-recycling, and is considered a malpractice; creating duplication of the data in the academic literature.
- Using images from a website or other copy righted-articles without permission.
For dealing with plagiarism whether detected before or after publishing of an article COPE guidelines are followed by Zeal Press . For complete understanding and details below flowcharts by COPE may be viewed:
https://publicationethics.org/files/plagiarism%20B.pdf & https://publicationethics.org/files/plagiarism%20A.pdf.
Zeal Press holds the right to reject or retract the manuscripts if plagiarism detected before or after publishing of the manuscripts, respectively; and to contact or inform the authors’ institutions about the detected plagiarism.
- Referencing the source and putting quotation marks around the word-for-word copied text if literal copying is direly needed, and seeking appropriate permission where applied.
- Keeping a good record of used sources while researching and the places where these are used it in your manuscript.
- fully acknowledging and properly citing the original source of material in your submitted manuscript
- Paraphrasing is only acceptable if proper reference of the source has been provided and the intended meaning are retained, even after changing of words by the author.
- To refrain from text-recycling, proper mentioning of previously published paper should be made, even if you are reusing something in your own new words; also the authors should avoid excessive self-citation of their own work.
- Make certain of not citing advertisements or advertorial material.
At Zeal Press , for all of their published work authors reserve the ownership of copyright for their article, but allow the readers to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute, and/or copy articles in the journals by Zeal Press provided the original authors and source are appropriately cited.
Zeal Press encourages that all Submissions to its journals should be the authors’ original work and its copyright is not previously owned by anyone, elsewhere. We welcome genuine and innovative work along with a strong encouragement for cross- disciplinary approaches. It is the corresponding authors’ responsibility to check for possible copyright conflict with the copyright holder and agree to our Publication Ethics.
The significant contributors to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study should be included as authors of the manuscript. Zeal Press takes no responsibility regarding the authorship matters including their names or the order of the authors’ list. In case of articles where we find firm evidence of dispute regarding any authorship matter, Zeal Press reserves the right of not publishing that article until complete resolution of the dispute and provision of a written agreement by all authors to that settlement. The participants, who have contributed in certain substantive aspects of the research project, should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. In case of manuscript submission by a group of researchers, at least one of them should be identified by name as the corresponding author and for being responsible for communications related to manuscript publication and responding to inquiries, if any, about the published article.
The corresponding author is the author responsible for communicating with the journal for publication related matters. Being a corresponding author means to ensure that all authors agree to be the co-authors, accept their order of names as listed in the submitted article and agree on the content of the article and its submission for publication and have approved the final version of the paper.
Conflict of interest
A conflict of interest may arise when the author or author’s institution may have a financial, non-financial, and personal or any other association with the publisher or the people involved in the publishing process, which may influence integrity of the author’s work. They should declare any conflict of interest at the time of submission of manuscript or at the earliest possible stage.
The conflicts should be included at the end of the manuscript, before the references, under the heading of “Conflict of Interest”. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, and allowances, paid expert testimony, past and present affiliations or other funding.
If any conflict of interest is suspected, it should be reported to the Zeal Press or Editor.
The mention of such interests does not make the manuscripts unethical but they should be acknowledged. In case of no conflict, the authors are required to include this in their manuscripts as well stating, “The authors declare no conflict of interest”.
Zeal Press clearly mentions that the data and opinions appearing in the articles and advertisements in its journals are the sole responsibility of the contributor or advertiser concerned. The Society’s officers, agents, Editors, and the Editorial Board accept no responsibility or liability for the consequences of any such inaccurate or misleading data, opinion, or statement. Though we try our best to make sure that no inaccurate/misleading data or statements are published in our journals, any use of the published content is at users’ own risk and Zeal Press is not supposed to accept any liability arising from such use.
Peer Review Policy:
Zeal Press makes it mandatory that all submissions to its journals undergo the peer review process. At least two independent and expert reviewers from the relevant field will be involved in this review.
First of all, the submissions are reviewed by the journals’ staff for their completeness and then are sent to a member of editorial board to assess its suitability for the journal and further peer review. The editorial members for this early assessment are chosen based on the absence of any conflict of interest.
Editors are expected to select the reviewers for an article based on their expertise, previous performance, repute in the field and conflict of interest with the submission. A speedy yet diligent and rational review is highly regarded and always expected for all the submissions. In case of reviewers’ names suggestion by the authors the editorial member will independently verify the conflict of interest and suitability of the reviewer for the article. Every article is reviewed by at least one reviewer, not recommended by the authors. The authors sometime may request to include/exclude specific reviewers for the peer review of their articles. Such request may be considered by the journals’ editorial board however, the editors hold the final authority to take decisions on the choice of peer reviewers for assessing the manuscript.
Zeal Press believes that diversity of reviewers brings forth best possible constructive critique therefore, gender, race and geography of reviewers is considered while choosing a reviewer for a submission.
To ensure the high quality of review process, all articles go through a double-blind peer review where identities of both authors and reviewers are hidden from each other. Also, as the communication between editors and peer reviewers may contain confidential information these are not shared with third parties.
Acknowledgment of Financial support
In case of funding provided by the institutional or government authorities for the research reported in the article, all such sources of funding should be duly acknowledged and disclosed at the end of the article. If funding sponsors had any role in the design of the study, in the collection, analyses or interpretation of data, in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results; it must be declared in this section.
Digital Data Preservation:
We offer the authors having a liberal self-archiving policy, which permits authors to self-archive their accepted manuscript shortly after first online publication.
Publication Ethics Statement:
The editors of Zeal Press journals implement a rigorous peer-review process while strictly adhering to the ethical policies and standards to ensure the publication of high-quality scientific studies being added to the existing research pool. In case any sort of ethical issues arises, we are committed to investigate and take actions as deemed required for maintaining the integrity of the literature while simultaneously ensuring the safety of research participants.
- FOR AUTHORS:
Authors wishing to publish their papers in Zeal Press journals must follow the below Ethics guidelines:
- Any possible conflict of interest of the author(s) must be clearly disclosed in the paper prior to submission.
- Any change to the author list including the order of names during the editorial process or after acceptance for publication should be approved by all authors, including any who have been removed. Zeal Press reserves the right to request evidence of authorship, and changes to authorship after acceptance will be made under its vigilance.
- Data and methods used in the research article should be presented in sufficient detail unless there is compelling justifications otherwise.
- Simultaneous/concurrent submission of manuscripts to more than one journal is not permitted.
- There is absolutely no room for any form of plagiarized work. Submitting an article to Zeal Press journals for publication means the authors agree that the publishers have the legal right to take necessary action in case any plagiarism or fabricated information is discovered.
- If the submitting author wishes to publish translations of the previously published articles by some other publisher he/she should ensure that they have appropriate permission(s), clearly indicating that the material has been translated and re-published, and provide the primary source of the material. If the Editor-in-Chief senses some overlap he/she may request the related publications to be provided to the publisher.
- Authors should not recommend collaborators or colleagues who work in the same institution as themselves as peer reviewers. Recommended reviewers should have no conflicts of interest that may include (but not limited to) the below:
- The reviewer should not be aware of your submission
- There must be no recent collaboration between suggested reviewer and any of the authors.
The suggested reviewer’s institutional email address and ORCID or Scopus ID will be required to help the Editor verify the identity and expertise of the reviewer.
- For any previously published content (including quotations, figures or tables), necessary permission to publish must be obtained from the copyright holder and provided to the publisher.
- If any of the authors finds any error/ inaccuracy in the manuscript after publication, it must be promptly communicated to the Editorial Office through corresponding author.
The above list is expandable; and all authors are advised to keep them abreast with local regulations and accepted criteria practiced in academic publishing.
- Peer reviewers should give their reports in English language.
- Reviewers are instructed that a constructive critical evaluation of the authors’ work must be provided, particularly regarding the appropriateness of methods used, accuracy of the results, and whether the conclusions are supported by the results presented in the article.
- Short, superficial peer reviewer reports which do not provide a good rationale are highly discouraged.
- Reviewers should identify any published work that has not been cited by the authors and mention it in their report.
- Reviewers are requested to inform the journal editor in case of any possible conflict of interests that may positively or negatively prejudice the review report. Usually the Editorial Office keeps an utmost check over this before inviting the reviewers; however, in case of any overlook we appreciate the cooperation of reviewers in this matter. Conversely, if reviewers had previously reviewed manuscript for another journal and they are invited to do so for Zeal Press it is not considered as a conflict of interest per se.
- Reviewers must keep all contents of the manuscript confidential. If they like a student or colleague to complete the review on their behalf, they are obliged to inform the editorial office.
- All Zeal Press journals function with double-blind peer reviews. Reviewers should practice caution not to reveal their identity to the authors in any way in their comments.
- All reviews should be objectively and professionally conducted without any sort of personal criticism to the author. Reviewers are requested to express their academically proficient views clearly with supporting arguments.
The Editorial Office, along with the Editors-in-Chief, Editorial Board Members, and Guest Editors is responsible for maintaining the integrity of Zeal Press journals. Below is a brief description of particular ethical aspects of their roles.
- The editor assigned with the responsibility of evaluating a manuscript should make all possible efforts to make sure that the manuscripts shall be evaluated solely on their intellectual merit without any discrimination based on the authors’ race, gender, religious belief, ethnicity, nationality, or political philosophy.
- If the editor feels ethical reservations regarding the review or acceptance decision of a manuscript, or finds concrete evidence about any ethical violation after its publication, he is supposed to inform the editorial office immediately.
- The editors are responsible to check that the ethical approval and permissions for research has been appropriately obtained if it involves human subjects, animals or cell lines.
- Any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than those involved in the potential review, editorial advisers, and the publishing team members.
- The editor must be vigilant that no piece of unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must be used by anyone who has sighted the manuscript (while handling it) in his or her own research without the explicitly written consent of the author.
- When making a final acceptance decision on a manuscript, editors should consider that facts likely to be supposed as a conflict of interest of the author(s) must be disclosed in the manuscript prior to its submission.
- Editorial decisions should be based on peer reviewer comments that meet these criteria rather than on recommendations made by short, superficial peer reviewer reports which do not provide a rationale for the recommendations.