According to COPE instructions, this is the following ethics of the journal:
Confidentiality
To avoid the misappropriation of ideas that may affect the originality of new research, confidentiality is essential. Peer reviewers should follow the following principles for this purpose:
Do not discuss article information or review with anyone other than the editors of the journal.
Do not utilize manuscript information or review for the benefit or detriment of anybody
Objectivity
Objectivity is required to ensure a fair evaluation of the authors' paper. Therefore, peer reviewers are urged to:
Avoid negative prejudices including nationality prejudice, research topics, or bad findings (on a language or affiliation)
Avoid favorable inclinations owing to the prominence of an author, as in the case of the honorary author
Blind to the identities of authors to minimize partiality in a double-blind review.
The authors stay covert, in a double-blind peer review, to decrease the chances of conflict or retaliation, so that candid criticism is possible.
Indicate any conflicting or conflicting interests, such as the same study topic/ competition, a close personal connection or co-operation with the authors, etc.
Do not ask for personal benefit citations of your work.
Integrity
Integrity includes a comprehensive, suitable, and honest manuscript evaluation that relies largely on objectivity. Peer reviewers who consent to a paper review must have:
Specialization and experience in the field.
Honestly to the journal about your identity
Readiness to review and examine resubmissions and amendments
Capacity to read the entire manuscript extensively, even if evaluated by a new journal before, and return the review in due course.
The capability to follow the particular scope, policy, and peer-review methodology of the journal
The skills to report any ethical concerns, such as duplicate publishing, data falsification, or unethical design.
The skills to give useful comments, instead of baseless criticism, to both the authors and the editors in a polite manner, such as ideas for relevant references, particular experiments that might enhance the research, and methods to increase understanding.
Ethical considerations for authors and journal editors
There are additional ethical concerns for both authors and editors when it comes to peer review:
Authors are usually allowed to identify academics who they would like not to evaluate their article (Opposed Reviewers) because of potential conflicts of interest, such as working in the same study area.
Reviewers' performance may be evaluated regularly by journals to verify that peer reviewers are following the journal's ethical standards.
The peer-review process must be kept private by journal editors. Outside of the peer-review process, they must not disclose information about a manuscript to anybody.
If editors believe the submission is unsuitable for the journal or beyond its scope, they may reject it without formal peer review.
Journal editors are to assign an editorial or advisory board member the peer evaluation, if appropriate, of any self-written research paper.
Any data or analysis in a submitted article should not be utilized in a journal editor's study without the author's permission.
Before the author submission, the following consequences are required:
Read the author's instructions in the journal and verified and followed any data sets, approval, or statement directions.
On the paper and the online submission form, provide the names of all authors.
All data in the text should be clear with fully referenced interpretations.
Check the data thoroughly and incorporate any additional information requested by the journal.
Any relevant conflicting interests should be declared to the journal.
To reuse any figures, tables, or data sets, the authors must get permission.
One article should only be submitted to one journal at a time.
Once the corresponding author submits the article the co-authors will be notified by email.