Open Access

Inforvidor journals are GOLD OPEN ACCESS journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.

Copyright & License

Inforvidor journals applies the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license to published articles. Under this license, authors retain ownership of the copyright for their content, but they allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content as long as the original authors and source are cited. Appropriate attribution can be provided by simply citing the original article.

Copyright Duration

Copyright is legally valid for a fixed period of time. The length of the period varies depending on the copyright laws of each country. It is usually from 50 to 70 years after the death of the author. Once this term has expired, however, legal rights to the work also expire. After that, the work becomes part of the public domain and can be used freely.

Publication Ethics

Inforvidor journals follows the core practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and handles cases of research and publication misconduct accordingly.

Ethical Guidelines for Authors

1. Inforvidor journals does not allow dual publication (the same material published twice in the peer reviewed literature), or dual submission (the same material simultaneously submitted to more than one journal).

2. Inforvidor journals does not tolerate plagiarism, data or figure manipulation, knowingly providing incorrect information, inaccurate author attributions, failures to declare conflicts of interest and fraud. This list is not well-rounded - if there is uncertainty of what constitutes such actions, then more resources may be found at the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

3. Conflict of Interests

All authors must disclose all relationships or interests that could inappropriately influence or bias their work. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include but are not limited to financial interests (such as membership, employment, consultancies, stocks/shares ownership, honoraria, grants or other funding, paid expert testimonies and patent-licensing arrangements) and non-financial interests (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, personal beliefs).

Authors should declare any and all conflicts involving myself or my co-authors in the "Comments for the Editor" field via the online submission system.

If no conflicts exist, the authors should state: the authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Editors

Journal editors are requested to adhere to the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal editors and following ethical guidelines:

Journal editors should:

• strive to ensure that peer review at their journal is fair, unbiased and timely.

• ensure that all published reports and reviews of research have been reviewed by suitably qualified reviewers.

• make decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the scope of the journal without interference from the journal owner/publisher or other third parties.

• require reviewers to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission.

• keep the peer-review process confidential, information or correspondence about a manuscript should not be shared with anyone outside of the peer review process.

Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

Reviewers are strongly recommended to comply the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers and adhere to following ethical guidelines:

Peer reviewers should:

• only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner.
• respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal.
• not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others.
• declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest.
• not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations.
• be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libellous or derogatory personal comments.
• acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavour and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and in a timely manner.
• provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise.

Human or Animal Subjects Research

Research involving human or animal subjects must ensure all procedures are performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines. Manuscripts relying on clinical trials should quote the trial registration number at the end of the abstract. The author must obtain review and approval (or review and waiver) from their Institutional Review Board (IRB) before manuscript submission if the work involves the use of animal or human subjects. Manuscript authors that describe multisite research must get approval from the IRB at each respective institution.

For human subjects, the authors must ensure that their research was carried out following the rules of the Declaration of Helsinki, as revised in 2013. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. Human subjects' right to privacy must always be observed. A statement of IRB approval or waiver (and reason for waiver) or a statement of adherence to the Declaration of Helsinki must be included in the manuscript. An example of the Institutional Review Board Statement: "All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code)."

For animal subjects, all experiments should comply with the ARRIVE guidelines and should be carried out in accordance with the U.K. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 and associated guidelines, or EU Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, or the U.S. Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. A statement identifying the institutional and/or licensing committee approving the experiments, including any relevant details must be included in the manuscript. If no animal ethics committee is available to review applications, the ethics of research will be evaluated by reviewers and editors. Authors should provide a statement justifying the work from an ethical perspective.

Artificial Intelligence

Inforvidor journals follow Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines for the use of artificial intelligence in manuscript writing, which state that authors should not list a generative AI technology as a co-author or author of any submitted manuscript:

AI tools cannot meet the requirements for authorship as they cannot take responsibility for the submitted work. As non-legal entities, they cannot assert the presence or absence of conflicts of interest nor manage copyright and license agreements.

Authors who use AI tools in the writing of a manuscript, the production of images or graphical elements of the paper, or the collection and analysis of data must be transparent in disclosing in the Materials and Methods (or similar section) of the paper how the AI tool was used and which tool was used. Authors are fully responsible for the content of their manuscript, even those parts produced by an AI tool, and are thus liable for any breach of publication ethics.

Long-Term Digital Preservation

A key part of the scholarly communications infrastructure is digital preservation. We are dedicated to maintaining all academic resources published in Inforvidor journals for the foreseeable future. To guarantee the continued accessibility of digital content, we work with PKP Preservation Network.

Deposit Policy

Authors are encouraged to deposit the final published PDF as follows:

• on public eprint server
• on a non-profit server
• on the personal website
• on the company or institutional repository

Authors should provide a link from the deposited version to the URL of the journal's website.

Correction Policy

For maintaining the integrity of the scientific record and avoiding inconsistencies downstream, minor corrections that do not affect the scientific understanding of the paper (for example, formatting or typographical errors or preference of wording) may be rejected if submitted post-publication.

The correction procedure depends on the publication stage of the article, but in all circumstances, a correction notice is released as soon as possible.

Online First publication: Inforvidor journals will consider replacing the Online First version with an updated version that corrects the error and notes the changes that have been made and the date(s) on which the changes were made (in a correction notice at the end of the article).

Publication in an issue: If the article has already appeared in an issue, a correction notice will be released in the next available electronic and print issue. The online version of the article will link to the correction notice.

Retraction Policy

Retractions are considered by journal editors in cases of evidence of unreliable data or findings, plagiarism, duplicate publication, and unethical research. All retraction notices explain why the article was retracted. A retraction notice will also be published in the next available electronic and print issue.

Editors should consider retracting a publication if: 

• They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of a major error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error) or as a result of fabrication (e.g., of data) or falsification (e.g., image manipulation).
• It constitutes plagiarism.
• The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources, disclosure to the editors, permission to republish, or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication).
• It contains material or data without authorization for use.
• Copyright has been infringed, or there is some other serious legal issue (e.g., libel, privacy).
• It reports unethical research.
• It has been published solely on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer review process.
• If the author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest, it would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers. 

Preprint Policy

Our journals accept articles previously published on preprint servers. You are requested to update any pre-publication versions with a link to the final published article. You may also post the final published version of the article immediately after publication.

Advertisement Policy

Currently, the journal does not include advertising, and no advertisements will be featured in the articles, on the official website, or elsewhere associated with the journal. 

Information of Consent

The authors should ensure that the individual rights of all the participants who are involved in the study are protected. Identifying details (e.g., names and dates of birth) of the participants that were studied should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, or genetic profiles unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the participant (or parent or guardian if the participant is incapable) gave written informed consent for publication.

Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could be viewed as inappropriately influencing their work. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding.

Appeals & Complaints

Appeals

Authors may appeal if they feel that the decision to reject was based on: i) a major misunderstanding over a technical aspect of the manuscript; or ii) a failure to understand the scientific advance shown by the manuscript. Appeals without sufficient justification will not be considered. To appeal, please contact the Managing Editor by Email within 3 months from the decision date, quoting your manuscript number. Appeals will only be considered by the original submitting author.

The manuscript and any relevant materials will be sent by the Managing Editor to a designated Editorial Board Member. This delegate would provide a recommendation on the manuscript and may recommend acceptance, further peer review, or uphold the original rejection decision. The Editor-in-Chief would make a final decision based on the recommendation. A rejected decision at this stage is final and cannot be reversed.

Complaints

We welcome complaints because they allow us to do better, and we'll respond promptly and constructively. We address the following complaints:

• Complaint about scientific content
• Complaint about processes
• Complaint about publication ethics

The complaint should, in the first instance, be handled by the Editor-in-Chief. If the Editor-in-Chief is the subject of the complaint, please contact the Managing Editor who will send the relevant materials to a designated Editorial Board Member. All complaints will be acknowledged (within 5 working days if by email). If possible, a definitive response will be made within 4 weeks. If this is not possible, an interim response will be given within 4 weeks. Interim responses will be provided until the complaint is finally resolved.

Research Data

We strongly endorse The FAIR Data Principles and believe that where ethically and legally feasible, all research data should be findable, accessible, interoperable, and re-usable. We encourage authors of articles published in our journal to share their research data including, but not limited to: raw data, processed data, software, algorithms, protocols, methods, and materials.

Subject to appropriate ethical and legal considerations, authors are encouraged to:

• Share your research data supporting the results in the paper in a relevant public data repository.
• Provide a data availability statement linking to your data and describe how the data can be accessed, or use the statement to confirm the reason why sharing your data is not possible.
• Cite this data in your research and include a persistent identifier (e.g., a DOI for the data, or an accession number).

Data Availability Statement

If you're submitting your paper with a data sharing policy, then you'll be prompted to provide a data availability statement with your submission. A data availability statement tells the reader where the research data associated with a paper is available, and under what conditions the data can be accessed. They also include links (where applicable) to the data set.