Review Process of HRMARS
All journals published by HRMARS are peer-reviewed journals with editorial boards comprising qualified members. Members of the Editorial Board, qualified reviewers, or editors review the manuscripts. The reviewers’ identities remain anonymous to the authors. The journal attempts to convey reviewers’ comments on manuscripts to the authors within three weeks. Manuscripts accepted pending revision will be re-reviewed by the Editorial Board. HRMARS attempts to publish manuscripts within four weeks of submission.
Proofs and Reprints
An electronic proof will be sent to the corresponding author as a PDF file attached to an email. The final version of the manuscript will be considered the page proof. No changes will be made to the manuscript at the proof stage except for clerical or typographical errors. Authors will have electronic access to the full text (PDF) of the article and can download the PDF file, from which they can print unlimited copies of their articles.
Copyright
HRMARS journals provide immediate open access to their content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. Copyright in articles published in HRMARS journals is retained by the authors, with first-publication rights granted to the journal. HRMARS is not responsible for subsequent uses of the work. It is the author’s responsibility to bring an infringement action if the author so desires. The authors must complete, sign, scan, and return the Statement of Originality.
Publication Decisions
The Editor-in-Chief of the journal is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor may be guided by the journal’s editorial policies and constrained by applicable legal requirements concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may consult members of the Editorial Board or reviewers when making this decision.
The Editor-in-Chief and the reviewers evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.
The Editor-in-Chief, members of the Editorial Board, and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in the personal research of the Editor-in-Chief or members of the Editorial Board without the author’s express written consent.
Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board in making editorial decisions. Through editorial communication with the author, it may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Promptness: A selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript, or who knows that a prompt review will be impossible, should notify the editor and decline to review the paper.
Confidentiality: 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 unacceptable. Referees should express their views clearly and support them with arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should attempt to identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that a result or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also bring to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.
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 behavior and are unacceptable.
Data Access and Retention: Authors are encouraged to provide the raw data associated with a paper for editorial review and public access, consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases, where possible. In any event, authors should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism: Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works. If they have used the work or words of others, they must ensure that these have been appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication: An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or conference. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal or conference constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
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.
Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Those who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors, and no inappropriate co-authors, are included on the paper; that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper; and that all co-authors have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscripts any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their work. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their 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.