Engineering Nexus is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all necessary measures to prevent unethical practices. This statement outlines the ethical principles that all parties—authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher—are expected to follow. The journal’s policies are guided by the ethical frameworks established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).
Our mission is to publish original and high-quality scientific work that contributes meaningful value to the global intellectual community. Achieving this goal requires authors to demonstrate honesty, originality, and scholarly integrity, and editors and reviewers to demonstrate fairness, confidentiality, and objectivity. Engineering Nexus is committed to adhering to best practices in matters concerning publication ethics, corrections, and retractions, and will seek legal review where necessary. In the event of any ethical dispute, the journal follows COPE’s best-practice guidelines.
If a submitted study involves chemicals, humans, animals, or any procedures or equipment that entail unusual hazards or ethical concerns, authors must explicitly identify these issues within the manuscript. When necessary, authors must provide official ethical approval documents from the appropriate institutional or legal authorities.
If the study includes confidential, proprietary, or sensitive data (e.g., industrial practices, business strategies), authors must justify why this information should remain confidential.
Engineering Nexus is fully committed to the protection of intellectual property rights. Authors, editors, and reviewers share the responsibility of safeguarding the originality and integrity of submitted work.
Authors confirm that:
The submitted manuscript is their own original work.
Copyright has not been transferred elsewhere.
No part of the manuscript involves plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or manipulated citations.
They have permission to reproduce copyrighted figures, tables, or data where applicable.
All versions of the manuscript remain the intellectual property of the authors.
They will maintain confidentiality regarding peer-review communications.
Editors and reviewers are likewise required to preserve the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and all associated correspondence.
Editors decide which manuscripts will be published based on their scientific value, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope. Editorial decisions must not be influenced by authors’ nationality, gender, ethnicity, religion, or other personal characteristics.
All information related to submitted manuscripts is treated as confidential and shared only with individuals directly involved in the evaluation process.
Editors must not use information from submitted manuscripts for personal research without written consent from the authors. They must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where a conflict of interest—professional, financial, or personal—exists.
All submissions undergo an initial editorial check to ensure compliance with journal standards and ethical rules. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable may be rejected without external review.
Submissions that pass initial screening are evaluated through a single-blind peer review process involving at least two independent experts. If reviewer opinions conflict, additional reviewers may be assigned.
Editors may appoint assistant editors, editorial board members, or external experts as reviewers. Reviewers must not have collaborated with the authors within the past three years or share institutional affiliations with them.
For details, please refer to the Peer Review Process page.
All ethical concerns raised about submitted or published work are investigated promptly and fairly. Engineering Nexus follows COPE’s best-practice guidelines to resolve issues relating to plagiarism, data manipulation, unethical research practices, and other forms of misconduct.
Only individuals who have made significant contributions to the design, execution, or interpretation of the research should be listed as authors. All co-authors must approve the final manuscript.
Requests for authorship changes after submission must be approved by the Editor-in-Chief and accompanied by a signed statement from all authors. No authorship changes are allowed after acceptance.
Authors must ensure that their work is original and properly cites prior literature. All submissions are checked for similarity using iThenticate before being sent for review.
All funding sources must be clearly acknowledged.
Authors must disclose all financial or personal relationships that may influence the work.
Manuscripts should provide accurate, detailed descriptions of the research. Misleading or intentionally inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour.
Authors may be asked to provide raw data during peer review and must retain data for a reasonable period after publication.
Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals, or publishing duplicate findings without justification, is unethical and prohibited.
If authors discover significant errors, they must notify the editor promptly to correct or retract the work.
Manuscripts must include ethical approval statements and confirm compliance with relevant laws, guidelines, and the Declaration of Helsinki.
Reviewers must disclose potential conflicts and decline reviews where necessary.
Reviewers should accept a review only if they can complete it within the requested time frame.
Reviews must be objective, constructive, and respectful. Reviewers should avoid personal criticism and refrain from suggesting self-citations unless scientifically justified.
Manuscripts and reviewer comments must remain confidential.
Reviewers must report suspected ethical issues directly to the editor.
Engineering Nexus encourages authors to share datasets, protocols, software, and other research materials in public repositories. Authors should include a Data Availability Statement in their manuscripts.
Complaints should be directed to the Editor-in-Chief or the journal secretariat. All complaints are handled transparently according to COPE standards and may concern issues such as citation manipulation, unfair reviewer practices, or editorial misconduct.
Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, citation manipulation, and other forms of misconduct are investigated thoroughly. Submissions found to involve misconduct are rejected; published articles will be retracted.
Editors follow COPE flowcharts to guide investigations and responses, including contacting authors for explanations and consulting additional experts where necessary.
Articles may be retracted if:
Findings are unreliable due to error or misconduct.
The work constitutes plagiarism or redundant publication.
Data are used without authorization.
Legal or ethical issues arise.
Peer review has been compromised.
Conflicts of interest were undisclosed and significant.
Retraction procedures follow COPE guidelines and include public posting of a retraction notice linked to the original article.
Corrections may be issued when errors do not undermine the validity of the research but require amendment. Corrections may be:
Publisher corrections (errata)
Author corrections (corrigenda)
Addenda (additional clarifications)
Editors determine whether a correction is necessary.
Articles may be removed only in exceptional circumstances such as legal violations, defamation, privacy concerns, or health risks. Metadata are preserved, and a notice replaces the removed content.
Flawed articles posing health risks may be replaced with corrected versions, following full COPE retraction procedures.