•  
  •  
 

出版與寫作倫理 Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement

《嶺南學報》(Lingnan Journal of Chinese Studies, LJCS) 堅持質量至上的理念,力求所刊發的論文見解精湛,具有高度學術含金量,能爲國學某一領域提供新材料、新思維、新觀點。本刊不接受包含任何不當行為之研究報告,包含:剽竊、一稿多投(重複投稿)、杜撰(假造)資料、掛名與未揭露之利益衝突等。《嶺南學報》參考 Elsevier B.V. 和出版倫理委員會(COPEs)之期刊編輯實務指引(Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)提出之《出版倫理》(Publishing Ethics)規定,並以高專業水準和道德標準作為本刊出版流程作業之依歸。本流程的規範對象包括作者、期刊編輯以及審查員,其所應注意的責任與義務詳述如下:
https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/publishing-ethics


編輯者義務
出版決定權
本刊編輯應根據審查結果,以及論文研究主題之相關性及重要性,決定投稿文章是否出版。編輯者需遵行期刊編輯指導原則與違反毀謗、版權與剽竊之法律原則。編輯者可授權編輯委員會行使出版決定權。

匿名同儕審查
本刊採雙匿名同儕審查制度,編輯者對於投稿者與審查者之資料應予以保密,並須遵守期刊之審稿辦法。

公平原則
編輯者需依照論文內容及既定標準進行評審,不得依據種族、性別、性傾向、宗教、國籍與政治信仰作為評審標準。

機密原則
編輯者及相關人員不得向個別作者、評審委員、編輯顧問與出版者公開原稿之任何訊息。

利益申報
  1. 未取得作者之同意,編輯者不得將提交原稿中未發表著作為自己研究所用。
  2. 由匿名審查提供之訊息與構思必須符合機密原則並不得挪為私人利益之用。
  3. 當編輯認為投稿文章之作者、組織或可能有關連之學術單位與其有競爭、合作或其他利益衝突時,必須迴避稿件審查。
  4. 編輯者需要求作者公開相關利益衝突資訊。若利益衝突於出版後被揭露,需發表更正說明或發表撤銷出版或利害關係聲明等必要措施。
審查員義務
出版決策支援
提供專業審查意見以協助決定論文是否符合刊登標準。被選任之審查員若認為不適任或無法及時評審,必須通知編輯部並主動要求撤銷審查委員資格。

機密原則
審查員審核之原稿將視為機密文件,審查員不得向編輯者以外之任何人士或機構透露原稿之相關訊息。

客觀標準
審查員必須公正且客觀地執行評審工作,為自己的評審論述提供相關佐證,為改善論文質素提供專業意見。

引用說明
審查員需識別沒有被作者引註的相關資料,前人進行之監測、調查或內容須附在相關引註內。審查員也必須提醒編輯者注意任何與其他作者有大致相似性或部分重疊的部份。

公開原則與利益衝突
未取得作者之同意,審查員不得將提交原稿中未發表著作為自己研究所用。被本學報授權獲得之訊息與構思必須符合機密原則,並不得挪為私人利益之用。當審查員認為與其他作者、企業與組織構成競爭、合作或其他關聯等利益衝突時,必須要求迴避審查委員資格。

作者義務
論文標準
作者需表明原始論文著作中之客觀討論精確度與重要性,基本研究資料須精確表示於文件中。研究論文必須包含參考資料與重要細節,以利他人重複實驗。任何構成不道德行為之詐欺與不正確敘述是不被接受的。回顧論文與專業發表之文章必須精確且客觀。

資料使用與保留
作者需保留原始數據,於出版後供編輯評審或大眾取得資料之用。

原創性與剽竊
作者應確保整份報告為自身之作品,若有使用其他作者之論述,須明確引述。剽竊等不道德行為是不被接受的,包含:私自挪用他人結論為自己成果、複製或重新闡示其他作品之精華與仿冒他人作品為自己著作。

複合、重複或同時出版之出版品
作者不應該同時發表本質上相同論文多個期刊或出版品,投稿同一份原稿至不同期刊被視為不符合出版道德的行為。一般來說,作者不能將之前被發表的論文投至另一期刊。但在特定的條件下二次出版(secondary publication)可被允許,不過作者與各(第一與二次)期刊編輯者均需同意進行二次出版,且二次出版的資料與闡釋必須與原第一次出版論文相符,而第一次出版也必須列於二次出版品之參考文獻內。

資料保密原則
作者必須善盡引用他人作品的責任。作者應並應舉出影響研究本質的因素。私底下獲得之資訊,如對話、書信、第三方之討論等,若無資料來源明確的書面授權函,不應使用或發表。透過審查他人文件而獲得之資訊,例如審閱他人稿件或申請書,如無原著人明確的書面授權函,不應使用或發表。

期刊論文作者
論文作者意指對論文之構思、設計、執行、闡釋等有重大貢獻者,凡有上述貢獻者均需列於共同作者之列。而若有其他人參與了論文的某些實質面向(例如語言編輯或寫作),他們應被列在致謝部分,以致感謝之意。所有作者均應確保論文中沒有不適當之共同作者,並且確保共同作者皆看過、認可論文的最終版本,以及同意提交論文出版。通訊作者需確保對論文有所貢獻的共同作者均正確列出,且所列之共同作者不包含對論文沒有貢獻者。通訊作者亦需在投稿前,確保所有共同作者均已檢視且同意最終版本之手稿,且對該文章之發表無異議。

利益申報
作者需公開任何可能被視為影響研究結果或結果闡釋的所有研究經費來源或其他會有利益衝突的資料,包含資金補助、計畫補助、僱傭關係、顧問、材料物品擁有權、報酬、專家證詞費用、專利申請/註冊或捐款授權。未來可能的利益衝突之資料必須儘申報。

研究內容錯誤說明
當作者發現研究內容含有錯誤或不正確資訊,應迅速通知編輯者與編輯部,並採取撤回論文或改正等相關措施。若編輯者或編輯部透過第三方得知研究論文(報告)包含重大錯誤,作者除了採取以上動作之外,需提供編輯者改正後之資料。


Lingnan Journal of Chinese Studies (LJCS) adheres to the highest standards of scholarly excellence, publishing original research articles with important theoretical insights and/or textual findings. Works involving plagiarism, duplicate submission, fabrication, ghostwriting, unrevealing conflicts of interests, and other inappropriate conduct are firmly rejected. LJCS adopts the Publishing Ethics advised by Elsevier B.V., and aims at a high level of professionalism and a standard of expected ethical behavior for the entire process of publishing a scholarly article. This process includes the roles of the author, journal editor, as well as the publisher. The duties of these stakeholders in the publishing process are described in the following.


Duties of Editors
Publication decision
Based on the outcome of peer-review and the relevancy and the significance of the research topic, editors are responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted should be published. Editors hold full authority to reject/accept a paper and must comply with the policy guidelines provided by the publisher and fulfill the responsibilities bestowed upon with integrity.

Peer review
The editor shall ensure that the peer review process is fair, unbiased, and timely. Research articles must typically be reviewed by at least two external and independent reviewers, and where necessary the editor should seek additional opinions.

Fair play
The editors will ensure that all manuscripts will be evaluated for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript and comments from peer review must not be used in the editors’ own research without the written consent of the author.

Editors should refuse themselves 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. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

Declaration of Competing Interests
Editor ought to ensure the equality and coherence of the peer review between the sponsored supplements and other manuscripts. In addition, the sponsored supplements must be in conformity with academic value orientation instead of commercial interests. It should disclose perspicuously whether there is a process of peer review.

Vigilance over the Published Record
The editor should work to safeguard the integrity of the published record by reviewing and assessing reported or suspected misconduct (research, publication, reviewer and editorial), in conjunction with the publisher (or society). 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.

Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decision
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript should notify the editors and excuse himself from the review process.

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

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments, and provide constructive feedback to assist the authors in improving their work.

Acknowledgement of Source
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. Reviewers should also call to the editors' attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the reviewers for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent. 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 associated with the papers.

Duties of Authors
Reporting standards
Authors of research paper 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. The published paper should contain sufficient details and references to permit others to replicate the work experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data.

Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from passing off another paper as the author(s) own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another(s) paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g., clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment 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. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

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 inappropriate co-authors are included on 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.

Declaration of Competing Interests
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict 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.

Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

Notification of Fundamental errors
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her 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. 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.