The editorial office may reject manuscripts if it is felt that the work was not carried out within an ethical framework. Plagiarism in any form constitutes a serious violation of the most basic principles of education, research and scholarship and cannot be tolerated.

This policy details the responsibilities of all authors, editors and reviewers working with and for Acta Simulatio journal as well as our ethical responsibilities. This includes, but is not limited to, plagiarism, data falsification, misuse of third party material, fabrication of results and fraudulent authorship.

The ethics principles for the Acta Simulatio (AM) scientific journal are based on the existing principles of the Guidelines of Committee On Publication Ethics (COPE) and of the ELSEVIER Publishing Ethics Resource Kit.

Duties of authors:

Reporting standards
The authors of reports 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. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial "opinion" works should be clearly identified as such.

Data access and retention
The authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality, acknowledgement of sources and plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be given. In addition, authors should cite publications that have influenced the reported work and give the work appropriate context within the larger scholarly record. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s paper, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), and claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
The authors should not generally publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not present a previously published paper for consideration in another journal. Publication of some kinds of articles in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, reflecting the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The direct reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Confidentiality
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. Likewise, 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.

Authorship of the paper
The authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the reported study's conception, design, execution, or interpretation. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper. All co-authors have seen and approved the article's final version and have agreed to its submission for publication. Authors take collective responsibility for the work. Each author is accountable for ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Hazards and human or animal subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must identify these in the manuscript. Suppose the work involves the use of animal or human subjects. In that case, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. In addition, the authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

Declaration of competing interests
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial and personal relationships with other people or organisations that could be viewed as inappropriately influencing (bias) their work. All sources of financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

Notification of fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, the author must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper if deemed necessary by the editor. Suppose the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains an error. In that case, the author must cooperate with the editor, including providing evidence to the editor where requested.

Image integrity
The authors should comply with any specific policy for graphical images applied by the relevant journal, e.g. providing the original images as supplementary material with the article or depositing these in a suitable repository.

Duties of editors:

Publication decisions
The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

Peer-review process
The editor shall ensure that the peer-review process is fair, unbiased, and timely.

Fair play and journal metrics
The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. In addition, the editor must not attempt to influence the journal’s ranking by artificially increasing any journal metric. In particular, the editor shall not require that references to that (or whomever) journal’s articles are included except for genuine scholarly reasons. Authors should not be necessary include references to the editor’s articles or products and services in which the editor is interested.

Confidentiality and unpublished materials
The editor and editorial persons must protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and reviewers. In exceptional circumstances and consultation with the publisher, the editor may share limited information with editors of other journals where deemed necessary to investigate suspected research misconduct. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s research without the author’s express written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Declaration of competing interests
The editor must not be involved in decisions about papers which s/he has written him/herself or have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest.

Vigilance over the published record
The editor should work to safeguard the integrity of the published record by reviewing and assessing reported or suspected misconduct (research, publication, reviewer and editorial) in conjunction with the publisher (or society). The editor shall make appropriate use of the publisher’s systems to detect misconduct, such as plagiarism.

Duties of reviewers:

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. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method. In addition to the specific ethics-related duties described below, reviewers are generally asked to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and observe good reviewing etiquette. Any selected reviewer 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 decline to participate in the review process.

Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share the review or information about the paper with anyone or contact the authors directly without permission from the editor. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s research without the author’s express written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Alertness to ethical issues
The reviewer should be alert to potential ethical issues in the paper and bring these to the editor’s attention, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has knowledge.

Standards of objectivity and competing interests
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias and take this into account when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Instead, reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. For example, suppose a reviewer suggests that an author includes citations to the reviewer’s (or their associates’) work. In that case, this must be for genuine scientific reasons and not to increase the reviewer’s citation count or enhance the visibility of their work (or that of their associates).

Duties of the Publisher:

Guardianship of the scholarly record and editorial independence
The publisher has a supporting, investing, and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practices are followed in its publications. Journal publisher is committed to providing that the potential for advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.