Spectrum of Mechanical Engineering and Operational Research (SMEOR) is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record and to addressing credible concerns relating to research and publication ethics. Suspected unethical behaviour or publication misconduct may be reported to the Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Office, or Publisher at any stage of the submission, peer-review, publication, or post-publication process.
Concerns may be raised by authors, reviewers, readers, editors, institutions, or other individuals. Reports should contain sufficient information to allow the journal to understand and assess the concern and, where available, should be supported by relevant documentation or evidence.
Ethical concerns will be considered regardless of when they are identified, including concerns relating to articles published several years earlier.
Research and publication misconduct may take different forms. Potential concerns include, but are not limited to:
The existence of an error, disagreement, methodological limitation, or difference in scholarly interpretation does not by itself establish misconduct. The journal will assess the available evidence and distinguish, as far as reasonably possible, between honest error and intentional or seriously negligent misrepresentation.
Authors must not fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or knowingly misrepresent data, results, analyses, calculations, images, references, research procedures, or other information presented in a manuscript or published article.
Fabrication includes making up data, observations, results, references, participants, experiments, analyses, or other research information and reporting them as genuine.
Falsification includes manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, data, images, calculations, analyses, or results, or selectively changing, omitting, or suppressing information in a manner that materially misrepresents the research or its findings.
Authors must not knowingly provide false or materially misleading information concerning authorship, affiliations, funding, conflicts of interest, ethical approval, informed consent, data availability, research methodology, permissions, or other declarations relevant to the editorial evaluation or publication of the work.
References and citations must correspond to genuine and appropriately relevant sources. Authors are responsible for verifying the existence, accuracy, and relevance of references included in their manuscripts and must not submit fabricated, nonexistent, or deliberately misleading citations.
Where the journal has reasonable grounds to question the authenticity, provenance, accuracy, or integrity of reported information, authors may be required to provide underlying data, original images, calculations, source files, code, documentation, ethical approvals, or other relevant materials necessary to assess the concern.
All credible allegations will be considered seriously and assessed according to their nature, severity, and the available evidence. The Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately designated independent editor will normally conduct or oversee the initial assessment.
Where an editor has a conflict of interest concerning the individuals, manuscript, or circumstances involved, that editor will not participate in the assessment or decision-making process. The matter will be assigned to an appropriate independent editor or other suitably qualified individual.
The journal may request additional information, documentation, underlying data, source files, code, correspondence, ethical approvals, authorship documentation, original figures or images, or other materials considered necessary to assess the concern.
Information relating to an allegation or assessment will be treated confidentially to the extent reasonably possible and will normally be shared only with individuals or organizations whose involvement is necessary for appropriate evaluation or investigation.
Individuals whose conduct or work is the subject of a substantive allegation will normally be informed of the relevant concern and given an appropriate opportunity to respond before the journal reaches a conclusion or takes substantial editorial action, except where legal, regulatory, confidentiality, or other compelling considerations require a different approach.
The journal will distinguish, where possible, between honest error, differences in scholarly interpretation, minor breaches of publication standards, and potentially serious misconduct. Editorial action will be proportionate to the nature and seriousness of the concern and the evidence available.
SMEOR may assess matters that fall within its editorial responsibilities. However, the journal does not normally have the authority or resources to conduct formal institutional investigations of research misconduct requiring access to employment records, laboratory documentation, confidential institutional information, or other evidence unavailable to the journal.
Where appropriate, the journal may refer a concern to an author's, reviewer's, or editor's institution, employer, research integrity office, funding organization, regulatory authority, or other competent body and may request that the relevant organization investigate the matter.
The journal may take into account the findings of an institutional or other competent investigation when determining what editorial or post-publication action is necessary.
Depending on the nature and seriousness of the concern and the stage at which it is identified, SMEOR may take one or more appropriate actions, including:
In cases involving established serious or repeated breaches of publication ethics, SMEOR may consider restrictions on future submissions, reviewing activities, or editorial involvement for a defined period.
Any such measure will be proportionate to the circumstances, appropriately documented, and consistently applied. Editorial restrictions imposed by the journal are separate from formal determinations of research, academic, employment, regulatory, or legal misconduct made by institutions, employers, regulatory authorities, or other competent bodies.
Publication does not prevent the journal from assessing concerns identified subsequently. Where credible concerns arise after publication, SMEOR may review the published article and relevant documentation and take appropriate action to preserve the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record.
Depending on the outcome, post-publication action may include a Correction, Expression of Concern, Retraction, or another appropriate notice in accordance with the journal's Retraction and Correction Policies.
Cases may be reconsidered if significant new evidence or relevant information becomes available after an earlier assessment has been completed.
Specific concerns involving unattributed reuse are considered under the journal's Plagiarism Policy. Conflicts of interest are addressed under the journal's applicable Conflict of Interests policy. These specific policies operate together with the present policy in protecting the integrity of the editorial process and scholarly record.
In assessing allegations of unethical behaviour and determining appropriate editorial action, SMEOR will consider relevant guidance and recommendations provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Each case will be evaluated according to its individual circumstances and the evidence available.
All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.