This journal endorses the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines and will pursue cases of suspected research and publication misconduct (e.g. falsification, fabrication, plagiarism, inappropriate image manipulation, redundant publication). In such cases, the journal will follow the processes set out in the COPE (https://publicationethics.org).
It is not permissible for author(s) to simultaneously submit essentially the same manuscript to the CPD and other journal(s). Plagiarism in all its forms is unacceptable. Therefore, the manuscript should be original and is not being considered or has been published in whole or in part with another journal. The submission of a multi-authored manuscript by a corresponding author implies that all co-authors had made significant contributions to the work.
Duties and responsibilities of the editor / editorial board:
The editor of the journal has full authority to reject or accept articles received.
The editor / editorial board of the journal must maintain the confidentiality of the submitted articles until their publication.
The editor must decide with the members of the editorial board and the reviewers whether or not to publish the received articles.
The editor / editorial board of the publication must keep the reviewers confidential in order to remain anonymous.
The editor / editorial board of the journal must maintain scientific integrity.
The editor / editorial board of the journal should pay attention to literary studies and issues related to plagiarism.
Duties and responsibilities of the reviewers:
The reviewers should assist the editor in deciding whether to publish the submitted articles.
Reviewers should maintain a policy of confidentiality and keep the articles referred to them confidential.
Reviewers must submit their opinions in a timely manner; to help the editor decide whether or not to publish the article.
The reviewers are obliged to keep the article received for review confidential and should not use the information obtained through peer review for personal gain.
The reviewers' opinions for reviewing each article should be technical, professional and objective.