Publication Ethics

The American Journal of Engineering and Technology (TAJET)
ISSN: 2689-0984

The American Journal of Engineering and Technology is committed to integrity, transparency, and accountability in scholarly publishing. Authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher share responsibility for maintaining ethical standards throughout submission, peer review, and publication.

1. Originality and Proper Attribution

Authors must submit original work and acknowledge all sources appropriately. Plagiarism—including unattributed use of text, ideas, data, images, code, designs, or methods—is unacceptable.

Reuse of previously published material must be cited and disclosed. Authors must obtain permission for third-party content where required and identify any separate copyright or licensing conditions.

2. Accurate and Transparent Reporting

Research methods, experimental conditions, computational procedures, results, and conclusions must be reported honestly and accurately.

The journal does not accept:

• Fabricated or falsified data.

• Deceptive image manipulation.

• Invented experiments, measurements, or simulation results.

• Selective reporting that materially misrepresents findings.

• Unsupported claims about performance, accuracy, efficiency, or reliability.

Authors must distinguish simulated results from experimental validation and demonstrated applications from proposed possibilities. Relevant assumptions, uncertainty, limitations, and unsuccessful outcomes that affect interpretation should be disclosed.

3. Exclusive Submission and Duplicate Publication

A manuscript must not be submitted to another journal while under consideration by TAJET. Previously published research must not be presented as new work.

Authors must disclose related manuscripts, preprints, conference papers, and substantial overlap with earlier publications.

An extended conference paper must cite the earlier version, explain its additional contribution, and comply with applicable copyright conditions. Minor changes to wording or presentation do not establish a new scientific contribution.

4. Authorship and Contributions

Authorship should reflect substantial intellectual contributions to the research and manuscript. All listed authors must approve the final submission and accept accountability for their contributions.

Individuals whose contributions do not qualify for authorship should be acknowledged with their permission. Gift, guest, purchased, and ghost authorship are unacceptable.

Changes to author names or order require an explanation and written agreement from all affected authors. Unresolved authorship disputes may delay assessment or publication.

5. Data, Code, and Reproducibility

Authors must retain supporting research records and may be asked to provide data, code, protocols, design information, or other documentation during assessment or investigation.

Manuscripts should include data and code availability statements where relevant. Restrictions arising from confidentiality, privacy, intellectual property, or other legitimate requirements must be explained.

Datasets, software, libraries, and technical resources developed by others must be cited appropriately and used in accordance with their licenses.

Comparative evaluations must use suitable baselines and transparent testing conditions. Authors must disclose methodological issues, such as data leakage or inappropriate test selection, that could compromise reported results.

6. Ethical Approval, Safety, and Permissions

Research involving human participants, identifiable personal information, animals, or other regulated activities must receive appropriate approval before the research begins, where required.

Authors must identify the approving authority and provide approval or permit details where available. Any exemption or waiver must be explained and attributed to the responsible body.

Research must address applicable informed consent, privacy, safety, environmental, and site-permission requirements. Studies involving hazardous materials, equipment, or procedures should describe relevant safeguards.

7. Intellectual Property and Confidential Information

Authors must have permission to publish proprietary data, industrial information, technical drawings, and other restricted material.

Relevant patents, patent applications, ownership interests, and commercial relationships must be disclosed where they could influence the work.

Authors must not disclose confidential information obtained through employment, consultancy, collaboration, or peer review without authorization.

8. Funding and Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose funding sources and relevant financial or non-financial interests that could influence the research or its interpretation.

Relevant interests may include employment, consultancy, share ownership, paid expert work, patents, or relationships with organizations whose products or systems are evaluated.

The funder’s role in study design, data collection, analysis, writing, and publication decisions must be stated. If no relevant conflicts exist, an explicit declaration should be included.

9. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors must assess manuscripts fairly according to scientific quality, originality, technical relevance, methodological soundness, and ethical integrity.

Editors must:

• Protect manuscript confidentiality.

• Select reviewers with appropriate expertise.

• Manage conflicts of interest and recuse themselves where necessary.

• Make decisions without discrimination based on authors’ personal characteristics or institutional affiliation.

• Investigate credible concerns about submitted or published work.

• Keep editorial decisions independent of payments and commercial interests.

Submissions from editors or editorial board members must receive independent handling. The submitting individual must not participate in reviewer selection or the decision on their own manuscript.

10. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers must provide objective, constructive, respectful, and timely assessments. They should decline assignments when they lack appropriate expertise, cannot complete the review, or have a conflict that compromises impartiality.

Reviewers must not disclose confidential material, use unpublished findings for personal advantage, or contact authors directly about the review without authorization.

Suspected plagiarism, data irregularities, substantial overlap, or ethical concerns must be reported to the editor. Citation requests must have a scholarly justification and must not primarily serve to increase personal or journal citation counts.

11. Use of Artificial Intelligence

Authors must disclose substantive use of generative AI in manuscript preparation, analysis, or content creation, identifying the tool and explaining its purpose.

When AI forms part of the research method, authors must describe relevant models, data, training or configuration, evaluation procedures, and limitations sufficiently for assessment.

AI tools cannot be listed as authors. Human authors remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, references, and integrity of submitted work.

AI-generated content must not be presented as genuine experimental observations or collected research data. Legitimate use of synthetic data must be clearly identified and explained.

Editors and reviewers must not upload confidential manuscripts, proprietary information, or unpublished data to external AI services without appropriate authorization and confidentiality protections.

12. Unacceptable Publishing Practices

The journal does not accept:

• Plagiarism, data fabrication, or falsification.

• Paper-mill submissions or purchased manuscripts.

• Fraudulent authorship or fabricated reviewer identities.

• Manipulation of peer review.

• Coercive citations or coordinated citation manipulation.

• False statements about approvals, permissions, funding, or conflicts of interest.

• Deliberate misrepresentation of submission, acceptance, or publication dates.

Publication charges do not guarantee acceptance or influence editorial decisions.

13. Complaints and Investigations

Suspected misconduct should be reported to the editorial office with relevant article details and supporting evidence.

The journal will assess concerns fairly, seek explanations from the individuals involved, and examine available documentation. Where appropriate, it may contact institutions, funders, ethics committees, or other responsible bodies.

Actions may include requesting clarification, suspending assessment, rejecting a submission, publishing an editorial notice, or correcting the scholarly record. Decisions will reflect the evidence and seriousness of the concern.

14. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

A correction may be issued when an error affects part of an article without invalidating its overall findings.

An expression of concern may be issued when a serious concern remains unresolved or an investigation is ongoing.

A retraction may be issued when findings are unreliable or publication involved a serious ethical breach. Retraction notices will explain the reason and link to the affected article. Retracted articles will normally remain accessible and clearly marked to preserve the scholarly record.

Authors must promptly report significant errors and cooperate in correcting their published work.

15. Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision by submitting a reasoned explanation and supporting evidence. Appeals will be assessed fairly, with independent editorial input where appropriate.

An appeal does not guarantee that the original decision will be changed.

Contact

Questions, complaints, appeals, and reports of suspected misconduct should be directed to the editorial office through the journal’s official Contact page.