PUBLICATION ETHICS

Duties of Authors

1. Reporting Standards: 
   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.
2. Data Access and Retention: 
   Authors are 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 (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
3. Originality 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 that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
4. 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. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
5. Acknowledgement of Sources: 
   Proper acknowledgement 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.
6. Authorship Criteria and Contributions

   Authorship should be based on substantial intellectual contributions to the manuscript and should not be granted solely on the basis of academic position, seniority, administrative responsibility, funding acquisition, or institutional affiliation. Administratio follows the principles of responsible authorship and expects all authors to meet the following criteria:

   1. Substantial Contribution: Each author must have made a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work; the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; or the development of the theoretical or conceptual arguments presented in the manuscript.

   2. Drafting and Critical Revision: Each author must have participated in drafting the manuscript or revising it critically for important intellectual content.

   3. Final Approval: All authors must have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript before submission and agreed to its publication in Administratio.

   4. Accountability: All authors must agree to be accountable for their respective contributions and to help ensure that questions concerning the accuracy, integrity, or validity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

   The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all individuals who meet the authorship criteria are included as authors and that no individual who does not meet these criteria is listed as an author. The corresponding author must also ensure that all co-authors have approved the final manuscript and agreed to its submission to the journal.

   Individuals who have contributed to the research but do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately in the Acknowledgements section, with their consent. Such contributions may include administrative support, technical assistance, language editing, or general supervision that does not constitute a substantial intellectual contribution.

   Author Contributions: All submissions should include an Author Contributions statement specifying each author's role in the preparation of the manuscript. Authors are encouraged to use the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT), where applicable, to describe individual contributions transparently.

   Changes in Authorship: Any request to add or remove an author or change the order of authors after submission must be justified in writing and approved by all authors involved, including the author being added or removed. Such changes are subject to the approval of the editorial office. Changes to authorship after publication will be handled in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies.

   Prohibition of Unethical Authorship Practices: Gift authorship, guest authorship, honorary authorship, and ghost authorship are unacceptable. All listed authors must meet the journal's authorship criteria, and all individuals who meet these criteria should be appropriately considered for authorship. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in rejection of the manuscript or further editorial action if the issue is identified after publication.

7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: 
   All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or another substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
8. Fundamental errors in published works: 
   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.
9. 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 clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Duties of Editors

1. Fair Play: 
   An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
2. Confidentiality: 
   The editor and any 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, as appropriate.
3. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: 
   Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
4. Publication Decisions: 
   The editor board journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors 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 editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
5. Review of Manuscripts: 
   The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organise and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. The editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

Duties of Reviewers

1. 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.
2. 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
3. Standards of Objectivity: 
   Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
4. Confidentiality: 
   Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.
5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: 
   Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
6. Acknowledgement 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.

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

1. Corrections

   Administratio is committed to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record. If errors are identified in a published article that do not invalidate its overall findings or conclusions, the journal may publish a correction notice. Requests for corrections may be initiated by authors, editors, or other parties who identify a verifiable error. All requests will be assessed by the editorial team to determine whether a correction is necessary. Published correction notices will clearly identify the affected article, describe the error, and explain the necessary amendments. The correction notice will be linked to the original article to ensure transparency and preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.

2. Retractions

   Administratio may retract a published article when there is clear evidence that its findings are unreliable due to major errors, research misconduct, fabrication or falsification of data, plagiarism, unethical research practices, or substantial redundant publication. Retraction may also be considered when an article has been published in violation of the journal's publication ethics policies and the violation significantly compromises the integrity of the scholarly record.

   Retraction decisions are made by the editorial team following a careful assessment of the available evidence and, where appropriate, consultation with the authors, reviewers, institutions, or other relevant parties. Authors will normally be given an opportunity to respond to the concerns raised. However, an author's disagreement or failure to respond will not necessarily prevent the journal from proceeding with a retraction when the evidence justifies such action.

   A retraction notice will explain the reasons for the retraction and identify the affected article. The notice will be linked to the original publication, and the original article will remain accessible where technically feasible, clearly marked as retracted. The journal will take reasonable steps to update relevant metadata and notify indexing services, as appropriate. Retraction is intended to correct the scholarly record rather than to punish authors.

3. Expressions of Concern

   Administratio may publish an Expression of Concern when serious questions arise regarding the reliability, integrity, or ethical compliance of a published article, but the available evidence is insufficient to make an immediate decision about correction or retraction. An Expression of Concern may also be issued when an investigation into potential research misconduct is ongoing or has been unreasonably delayed.

   The notice will describe the nature of the concerns as clearly as possible, subject to applicable confidentiality and legal requirements. The journal will review the matter as further information becomes available and may subsequently issue a correction, retract the article, or withdraw the Expression of Concern if the concerns are resolved. Expressions of Concern will be linked to the relevant article to inform readers while the matter is being investigated.

4. Editorial Responsibility and Due Process

   All decisions concerning corrections, retractions, and Expressions of Concern will be made in accordance with the principles of publication ethics, fairness, transparency, and editorial independence. Administratio will assess each case individually, consider relevant evidence, and provide affected authors with a reasonable opportunity to respond. The journal will handle all cases confidentially during the assessment process and will take appropriate action to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

   Where necessary, the journal may seek advice from the authors' affiliated institutions, research ethics committees, or other relevant bodies. Administratio follows applicable guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when handling publication ethics concerns. The final editorial decision will be based on the available evidence and the need to maintain the accuracy and reliability of the scholarly record.