Ethical Guidelines


Praise Worthy Prize publishes over 20 peer-reviewed journals in the fields of applied and theoretical sciences .
Praise Worthy Prize is committed to setting and upholding high standards of ethical behaviour and to this end we support the standards and best practices set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Below is a summary of the ethical standards we expect authors, editors and peer reviewers to meet.



Editor’s responsibilities

Praise Worthy Prize supports editorial independence; the Editor is accountable for everything published within their journal. It is the Editor’s responsibility:

  • To carry out all editorial duties in a responsible and fair way, without discrimination on grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the author.
  • To ensure that all correspondence is communicated in a professional and courteous manner at all times.
  • To consider and accept submissions exclusively on their academic merit, without commercial or other influence that may compromise intellectual standards.
  • To assess and approve any consent required from human or animal subjects in submitted research, considering the guidelines listed below.
  • To promptly correct any significant inaccuracies or misleading statements in published work once they have been brought to the Editor’s attention.
  • To investigate all complaints made against an author using open and fair procedures, allowing the author reasonable opportunity to respond to the complaint and to retain all documentation associated with the complaint. We suggest editors follow the COPE complaints procedure.
  • To produce clear aims and scope for the journal and to ensure that all Calls for Papers are unambiguous and not open to misinterpretation.
  • To appoint a diverse international editorial board whose knowledge and experience reflect the aims and scope of the journal, who act as ambassadors for the journal, and who are willing to act as peer reviewers for the journal.

These responsibilities are also incumbent on Guest or Special Issue Editors, for the term and within the scope of their temporary editorship.


Reviewer’s responsibilities

All articles are peer-reviewed externally by experts in the field, who are independent from the team responsible for making editorial decisions. Peer review is organized and overseen by the Editors of each journal. This process will often involve members of a journal's Editorial Board, who serve in an advisory capacity to the journal.

  • To ensure papers remain confidential while under review and not retain or copy the papers. 
  • To review papers objectively and in a timely manner.
  • To inform the Editor immediately of any potential misconduct related to a paper such as fraudulent material, plagiarism, conflict of interest or other unethical behaviour.
  • To follow the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers.


Authors’ responsibilities

  • To assert that the work in the paper is the author's own.
  • To assert that the article/paper submitted is original and not under consideration or accepted for publication elsewhere.
  • To obtain written permission from copyright holders for reproducing any images, tables, figures or other material that have previously been published elsewhere.
  • To obtain informed consent from/for any human or animal subjects referenced in the research, following the guidelines listed below.
  • To acknowledge and cite content reproduced from other sources.
  • To assert that the work contains no material which is obscene, hateful, libellous, in breach of privacy, or otherwise in contravention of the relevant law.
  • To promptly inform the editor of any significant inaccuracies or misleading statements in their work post-publication.
  • To declare any potential conflicts of interest.


Authorship policy

Before article production can begin, authors are required to complete a on-line form specifying that:

  • The contribution is the Author’s original work, and that it has not been previously published.
  • The contribution does not infringe on copyrights held by others, or on any other right legitimately claimed by a third party.
    • If, in contravention of the above, the contribution contains material copyrighted by others, all required written permissions have been secured for the re-publication of such material in accordance with the scope of the Praise Worthy Prize licensing requirements: the contribution contains no material that is obscene, hateful, libellous, in breach of privacy or otherwise in contravention of the relevant law.
  • All statements asserted as facts are either true, or else based upon generally accepted professional research practices.
  • Each of the named authors has contributed significantly to the material, research, interpretation and analysis present in the article.


Publisher's or association's responsibilities

Praise Worthy Prize shall ensure that good practice and ethical standards are maintained.



Editors should respond promptly to complaints and should ensure there is a way for dissatisfied complainants to take complaints further. 
Editors will follow the procedure set out by COPE on complaints.
Editors will seek the advice of the Publisher where necessary in difficult situations.
Complaints against the Editor will be investigated by the Publisher in the first instance.


Use of human or animal subjects

If your work involves live subjects (human or animal) you must seek written consent. All research involving animals must have been reviewed and approved by an ethics committee prior to commencing the study and performed in accordance with relevant institutional and national guidelines and regulations. A statement identifying the institutional and/or licensing committee approving the experiments must be included in the ethics statement in the article. If the study is exempt from ethics approval, authors need to state the reasons for exemption.

Please ensure that you include an Ethical Statement with your submission to the journal, including:

  • The name of the institutional or national research ethics committee that approved the research and the approval number given. If the research received a waiver of approval or did not require approval, please explain why. You should have clearly communicated any risk assessment, research purpose, method overview and the contribution’s implementation, etc.
  • For investigations involving animal experimentation, state which animal care and use guidelines were followed.
  • For investigations involving human participants, state that all participants (or a parent or legal guardian, in the case of children under 16) gave written informed consent to participate in the study and publish the results.

For more details, check the COPE Ethical Oversight guidance.



Any suspected case of plagiarism must be declared by the peer reviewer(s) and passed on to the editor(s) of the journal in question. The COPE guidelines for plagiarism in a submitted manuscript or for plagiarism in a published article shall be followed. The author will be officially notified by the editor, after which a comparison of the text will investigate the issue. In the case of a significant overlap, the editor will seek the author’s comment on the matter as well as a third opinion. Should plagiarism be confirmed, correction, withdrawal or retraction of the article are possible. The journal editor will make a reasonable judgement and present their recommendation to Praise Worthy Prize.


Retractions and corrections

In order to maintain the integrity of its journals, Praise Worthy Prize reserves the right to retract articles where there is clear evidence of unreliable or unethical research (error, fabrication, falsification), where findings have been published previously elsewhere and permission for republication was not sought or given, where material has been used without permission from the source, where copyrights have been infringed, where there has been a conflict of interest or where the peer review process has been manipulated.

In case of retraction, notice will be given promptly and clearly, and the article will be identified as retracted online. A retraction notice will be published in the journal, and this will be free for all readers.

Praise Worthy Prize follows the COPE guidelines on retractions.

Factual errors that do not undermine the integrity of the research but are confusing to the reader must be declared to Praise Worthy Prize and the editor of the journal, who will determine whether it is suitable to print an errata corrige (corrigendum) in the next possible issue of the journal.


Author name change policy

Praise Worthy Prize will change an author’s name and/or pronouns in any published article on request from the author. Author name changes can be requested for many reasons; Praise Worthy Prize will respect authors’ privacy and never require authors to disclose the reason for the change, only the details needed to trace the article. Praise Worthy Prize will adjust names and pronouns if necessary, re-upload the work to all third parties, and amend the print files for any future reprints (though we cannot withdraw copies already in circulation).
Authors should contact to ask for update any of their articles.



Editors should not act as representatives of the Publisher or make statements to the media, post comments or write editorials claiming to represent the Publisher without the Publisher’s prior agreement.

Please send any question about this web site to
Copyright © 2005-2024 Praise Worthy Prize