Editorial Policies & Publication Ethics

Editorial Policies

The editorial policies governing Materials Chemistry Horizons are collaboratively established by its Editorial Board in conjunction with UniverSci Press. We endorse transparency and ethical standards in research and publication practices. To maintain the integrity of scholarly work, all submitted manuscripts undergo a rigorous peer review process by experts in the field. Our editorial team ensures fairness, impartiality, and confidentiality throughout the review process, adhering to the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors.

Publication Ethics

Materials Chemistry Horizons is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in scholarly publishing. We adhere to the guidelines and principles set forth by reputable organizations such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Authors submitting manuscripts to Materials Chemistry Horizons are expected to comply with ethical guidelines concerning originality, plagiarism, data fabrication, and proper citation practices. Submitted works must be original and should not have been published elsewhere or be under consideration for publication in other journals.

Ethical considerations and conflicts of interest must be disclosed by authors to ensure transparency and credibility in their research. Materials Chemistry Horizons expects authors to acknowledge and cite sources appropriately, giving due credit to prior work that has influenced their research.

This journal will make every effort to prevent unethical practices. If any issues arise, we will follow the COPE guidelines provided in the COPE guidelines.

Peer Review Process

Materials Chemistry Horizons uses a single-blind peer review process. Manuscripts submitted to Materials Chemistry Horizons undergo rigorous evaluation by independent experts in the relevant field. Our reviewers assess the originality, scientific validity, methodology, and significance of the research presented in the manuscripts.

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two reviewers who provide constructive feedback, identify strengths and weaknesses, and offer recommendations to enhance the quality and impact of the research. The editorial team, in collaboration with reviewers, makes informed decisions regarding the suitability of manuscripts for publication. Reviewers are expected to adhere to their responsibilities as outlined in the COPE Peer Review Guidelines. The following Figure shows the review process.

Authors are provided with an opportunity to track the status of their manuscripts through their accounts on the journal's website. Our editorial office is readily available to assist authors and address any queries or concerns throughout the submission and review process.

Reviewers

Materials Chemistry Horizons extends its sincere appreciation to the esteemed reviewers who contribute their expertise and time to assess the submitted manuscripts. Our reviewers, eminent scholars and researchers in their respective domains, play a pivotal role in ensuring the quality and credibility of the publications in our journal. Their invaluable feedback and insights significantly shape the final outcome of the manuscripts published in Materials Chemistry Horizons.

Authorship

Authors must meet the criteria for authorship as defined by the COPE guidelines on Authorship Criteria and Authors’ Responsibilities. Changes to authorship after submission or during the review process must be communicated to the editorial office and must adhere to COPE's guidelines on Changes of Authorship.

Plagiarism

UniverSci Press journals are committed to publishing articles that offer originality and unique perspectives. Manuscripts submitted for publication undergo thorough scrutiny to ensure they do not contain text plagiarized from previously published works, including the authors' own materials. Submitted manuscripts are subjected to a comprehensive scan and cross-referencing using iThenticate or Turnitin. Should instances of plagiarism be identified, the manuscript may be rejected outright without undergoing the peer-review process.

Principles of Transparency

• Study Design and Ethical Approval

  Good research must be well-justified, well-planned, appropriately designed, and ethically approved. Failure to meet these standards may be considered misconduct. Authors are responsible for the scientific content and accuracy of the bibliographic information in their submissions.

• Data Analysis
  Data must be analyzed appropriately, although improper analysis may not always constitute misconduct. However, data fabrication and falsification are clear forms of misconduct.

• Data Availability
  Authors should provide clear data availability statements explaining how readers can access the data supporting the study's conclusions. If data cannot be released, the reasons must be clearly stated. Data supporting the findings must be available from the corresponding author upon request.

• Human and Animal Studies
  Manuscripts reporting research involving human subjects or animal studies must include a statement confirming that informed consent was obtained. Additionally, all studies must have received approval from a local ethics committee.

• Conflicts of Interest
  Conflicts of interest, whether personal, commercial, political, academic, or financial, must be disclosed as they can affect the judgment of authors, reviewers, and editors. Examples of financial conflicts include employment, funding, stock ownership, payments for lectures, and consultancies.

Policy on Research Misconduct

Research misconduct jeopardizes scientific integrity. The journal takes steps to prevent research misconduct, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification. If a manuscript is suspected of misconduct, the editor will contact the corresponding author for an explanation. Serious cases are referred to the Publication Committee, which may impose sanctions such as a ban on future submissions. In serious cases of fraud that result in the retraction of the article, a retraction notice will be published in the journal and will be linked to the article in the online version. The online version will also be marked “retracted” with the retraction date.

Investigating Misconduct

Any misconduct identified will be thoroughly investigated and may result in sanctions or retraction. Our journal is committed to maintaining ethical standards through rigorous editorial and peer review processes.

• Plagiarism: Copying someone else’s work without proper citation, including self-plagiarism, is unacceptable. All manuscripts undergo plagiarism screening. Detected plagiarism may result in rejection or retraction.

• Data Fabrication and Falsification: Fabrication involves making up data or results, while falsification involves altering data. Both are forms of misconduct.

• Duplicate Publication: Submitting the same work to multiple journals without cross-referencing is considered duplicate publication.

• Citation Manipulation: Including excessive citations solely to increase citation counts is a form of misconduct.

• Simultaneous Submission: Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals at once is prohibited.

• Redundant Publication: Dividing study results into multiple papers unnecessarily is a form of redundant publication.

• Improper Author Contribution or Attribution: All authors must have made significant contributions to the research and approved the final manuscript. Contributions from all individuals, including students and technicians, must be acknowledged.

Complaints and Appeals

We support legitimate challenges to editorial decisions. Appeals should provide strong justification, including new data or information. While editorial decisions are usually final, authors may appeal by explaining their concerns and providing additional evidence. The Editorial Board's decision on appeals is final.

Corrections and Retractions

• Corrections
  If errors are identified in published articles that impact the meaning or interpretation of the research, but do not invalidate the work as a whole, a correction (Erratum) will be issued. Corrections will be linked to the original article and indexed accordingly, ensuring transparency and continued access to the corrected information.

• Retractions
  In cases where significant errors or misconduct compromise the integrity of the research, a retraction may be necessary. Retractions are handled following COPE retraction guidelines and are clearly marked and linked to the original article. The retracted article remains in the public domain, but is labeled "retracted" with the date of retraction to ensure transparency.

Archiving and Self-Archiving

This journal uses multiple platforms to ensure long-term preservation of published content:

Scientific Information Database (SID)

Magiran

Internet Archive

In addition, authors are granted permission to self-archive the accepted manuscript, in either its published PDF or HTML versions, on their personal websites or other appropriate repositories for this purpose.

Societies and Partnerships

Damghan University
 

Advertising Policy

This journal maintains a policy against advertising. No advertisements are accepted or published.