In order to bring you the best possible user experience, this site uses Javascript. If you are seeing this message, it is likely that the Javascript option in your browser is disabled. For optimal viewing of this site, please ensure that Javascript is enabled for your browser.
Conferences  

Malpractice and Ethics Statement

The CIC conference technical and scientific committees are committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards for all parties involved in the review and publishing of the conference proceedings as elaborated below.


Technical Scientific Committee’s Responsibilities

Accountability: The CIC’s technical committee members are accountable and responsible for deciding which of the research papers submitted to the conference shall be accepted. They shall take appropriate action regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. They may confer with other reviewers in making decisions. 

Impartiality: Perform the reviewing process and publication decisions will be without regard to authors’ race, gender, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. 

Confidentiality:  Make sure of the non-disclosure of any information related to a submitted manuscript except to the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Fair play: Ensure the integrity of the publication review process. As such, technical committee members should not reveal the identity of reviewers to the authors.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used by a committee member’s research without the author’s express written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review will be kept confidential and will not be used for personal research work. Members of the technical committee make fair and unbiased decisions, independent of commercial considerations, and ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process. Technical committee members shall recuse themselves (i.e. should ask other members of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Members of the technical committee will require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action will be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations: Guard the integrity of the published records by issuing corrections and retractions when needed and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct. Technical committee members should pursue reviewers and editorial misconduct.  They should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher. Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

 

Plagiarism Detection

The CIC technical committee uses the iThenticate Plagiarism Detection Portal to identify similarities and/or plagiarism before the peer review process and acceptance.

In case of plagiarism, misuse of published articles, and/or illegal distribution of research papers is proven,  technical committee members immediately take the necessary actions to control and prevent any unethical action.

 
Reviewers Responsibilities


Contribution of Editorial Decisions: The peer review process assists the editors in making editorial decisions; it may also assist the author in improving the paper through the editorial communications and feedback given to the author.

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.

Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees 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.

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.

    

Technical and Scientific Committee’s Responsibilities

The technical and scientific committee members oversee the peer-review process, including evaluating submissions, selecting reviewers and assessing their comments, and making editorial decisions. They are involved in the development of policies and ethics standards.

  
Author Responsibilities

Reporting standards: Authors should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, and inappropriate data manipulation. Authors should describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that others can confirm their findings.

Originality and plagiarism: Authors should sign an “Author Declaration Form” and adhere to publication requirements that the submitted work is original, is not plagiarized, and has not been published elsewhere. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. If the authors have used the work and/or words of others, or quoted and accurately reflects individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. CIC technical committee reserve the right to reject papers they believe have been plagiarized from other sources, including the author’s previous publications.

Data Access and Retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Ethics: Authors should only submit papers of work that have been conducted ethically and responsibly and that comply with all relevant legislation. Authors should get necessary ethical approvals from involved institutions and individuals in the research. 

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts 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.

Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who 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 disqualifying co-authors are included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications:  An author 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 publishing outlet concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Fundamental errors in Published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her published work,  the author must promptly notify the conference 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.


Publisher’s Responsibilities

QU Press provides reasonable practical support to CIC editors so that they can follow the Committee On Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct. QU Press defines the relationship between the publisher, editor, and other parties in a contract that respects privacy (for example, for research participants, authors, for peer-reviewers), protects intellectual property and copyright and fosters editorial independence.