This journal is following of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and complies with the highest ethical standards in accordance with ethical laws.
Ethical guidelines for the Research in New Educational Approaches (NEA)
NEA strongly adheres to Code of Conduct approved by COPE available at: publicationethics.org regarding honesty, accuracy, efficiency, and objectivity in research, manuscript submission, manuscript review, and publication and is constantly monitored by the University of Isfahan’s Committee on Research Ethics and Research Misconduct. In the case of an ethical breach, appropriate punishment will be decided upon and applied by the Committee on Research Ethics.
Following the ethical guidelines approved and applied NEA, the contributors are required to have followed the ethical issues in conducting their research and disseminating their research outcomes. According to the ethical guidelines of NEA, some examples of ethical breaches include:
failure to properly obtain informed consent from the participants, submitting a manuscript to more than one journal at the same time, not acknowledging the funding sources, having conflict of interests with other contributors and co-researchers, including false and fabricated data in the paper, copying the works of other scholars without properly acknowledging them (plagiarism), publishing the same or almost the same work in different places.
To ensure that all the ethical guidelines are observed in the manuscripts submitted to ARE, all the authors are required to include Author’s Statement confirming that all the ethical guidelines have been followed in their research.
Duties of the Researcher (Author):
Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.
Data access and retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable.
Originality and plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
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. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
Fundamental errors in published work
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.
Authors shall be responsible for and recognized only for their own work.
Authorship shall be limited to individuals who have made a significant scholarly contribution to the research or reported study. Authors are usually listed in order of importance and relative significance of contribution. Ghostwriting or honorary authorship is a breach of publication ethics.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
The researcher (author) shall assure that his work is original and should not submit a manuscript that has already been published or submitted elsewhere for publication.
The researcher (author) must strive to revise their manuscript in accordance with the suggestions provided by the reviewers and/or the Editorial Board. In the event that the researcher (author) disagrees with a requested revision, a rationale must be provided in writing by the researcher (author) for not making the requested change.
The Editorial Board makes decisions regarding publication in NEA. In the decision-making process, the Editorial Board must respect the researcher's (author's) integrity as a scholar.
The Editorial Board shall review fairly the quality of the manuscript and whether it complies to the submission guidelines and review standards. Manuscripts shall be evaluated objectively without regard to race, gender, age, institutional affiliation, and/or other personal factors. Decisions to accept or reject a manuscript shall be based on importance, originality, clarity, and relevance of the research in the submission.
Reviewers are selected according to the content and scope of the submitted manuscripts, reviewers' area of expertise, and freedom from conflict of interest.
NEA is obliged to preserve confidentiality and shall not disclose the contents of the manuscript nor the identity of the author until the final decision to publish a researcher's (author's) submission has been made.
Duties of the reviewers:
Reviewers shall follow the review guidelines, complete the review within the designated time frame, and submit the review to the Journal Editor-in-Chief. In the case that the reviewer feels that they are inadequately qualified to review the assigned manuscript, the reviewer shall notify the editor to excuse themselves from the review process for the manuscript in question.
Reviews shall be fair, objective, constructive, timely, and confidential. In the manuscript review process, reviewers shall explain and support their views adequately.
Professional Respect and Integrity
When reviewing manuscripts, reviewers should respect the researcher (author)'s integrity as a scholar.
Manuscripts for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript. The manuscript may not be shown to or discussed with others.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgment of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
University of Isfahan’s Committee on Research Ethics and Research Misconduct
The Committee on Research Ethics works under the auspices of the University of Isfahan’s Vice-president for Research. This committee constantly monitors NEA to ensure its adherence to the ethical guidelines and publication standards. It is comprised of four permanent members and several invited experts depending on the issue at hand. The committee also investigates violations of research ethics such as fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and other deviant practices and suggests appropriate punishment or sanctions in the case of a violation.