• Quasitum
  • Ethics & Policies

    Ethical policy for Quasitum

    The ethical policy of Quasitum follows the UGC Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. It is also guided by the core practices and policies outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

    Authors must be honest in presenting their results and conclusions of their research. Research misconduct is harmful for knowledge. It could mislead other researchers.


    Research results

    Fabrication, falsification or selective reporting of data with the intent to mislead or deceive is unethical, as is the theft of data or research results from others. The results of research should be recorded and maintained to allow for analysis and review. Following publication, the data should be retained for a reasonable period and made available upon request. Exceptions may be appropriate in certain circumstances in order to preserve privacy, to assure patent protection, or for similar reasons.



    All those who have made a significant contribution should be given chance to be cited as authors. Other individuals who have contributed to the work should be acknowledged. Articles should include a full list of the current institutional affiliations of all authors, both academic and corporate.


    Competing interests

    All authors, referees and editors must declare any conflicting or competing interests relating to a given article. Competing interests through their potential influence on behaviour or content or perception may undermine the objectivity, integrity or perceived value of publication.


    Peer Review

    We are committed to prompt evaluation and publication of fully accepted papers in Quasitum. To maintain a high-quality publication, all submissions undergo a rigorous review process. Characteristics of the peer review process are as follows:

    • Simultaneous submissions of the same manuscript to different journals will not be tolerated.
    • Manuscripts with contents outside the scope will not be considered for review.
    • Papers will be refereed by at least 2 experts as suggested by the editorial board.
    • In addition, Editors will have the option of seeking additional reviews when needed. Authors will be informed when Editors decide further review is required.
    • All publication decisions are made by the journal's Editors-in-Chief on the basis of the referees' reports. Authors of papers that are not accepted are notified promptly.
    • All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. We expect our Board of Reviewing Editors and reviewers to treat manuscripts as confidential material as well.

    Editors and reviewers involved in the review process should disclose conflicts of interest resulting from direct competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, and remove oneself from cases in which such conflicts preclude an objective evaluation. Privileged information or ideas that are obtained through peer review must not be used for competitive gain.

    Our peer review process is confidential and identities of reviewers cannot be revealed.


    Reproducing text from other papers without properly crediting the source (plagiarism) or producing many papers with almost the same content by the same authors (self-plagiarism) is not acceptable. Submitting the same results to more than one journal concurrently is unethical. Exceptions are the review articles. Authors may not present results obtained by others as if they were their own. Authors should acknowledge the work of others used in their research and cite publications that have influenced the direction and course of their study.

    Duplicate submission

    Simultaneous submissions of the same manuscript to different journals will not be tolerated. The submitted article will be removed without consideration.

    Corrections and retractions

    All authors have an obligation to inform and cooperate with journal editors to provide prompt retractions or correction of errors in published works.

    The journal will issue retractions if:

    There are clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error);

    The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross referencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication);

    • It constitutes plagiarism;
    • It reports unethical research.
    • The journal will issue errata if:
    • A small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error);

    The author list is incorrect (i.e. a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included).

    Other forms of misconduct include failure to meet clear ethical and legal requirements such as misrepresentation of interests, breach of confidentiality, lack of informed consent and abuse of research subjects or materials. Misconduct also includes improper dealing with infringements, such as attempts to cover up misconduct and reprisals on whistleblowers.


    The primary responsibility for handling research misconduct is in the hands of those who employ the researchers. If a possible misconduct is brought to our attention, we will seek advice from the referees and the Editorial Board. If there is the evidence, we will resolve the matter by appropriate corrections in the printed and online journal; by refusing to consider an author's future work, for a given period, and by contacting affected authors and editors of other journals.

    Data Sharing

    We encourage authors to share the data in their research provided the data sharing conforms to relevant privacy regulations imposed by the studies. Authors are also encouraged to cite data and provide a data availability statement to confirm the presence or absence of shared data.

    How to raise a concern

    We strive to adhere to the standards guided by the core practices and policies outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).


    Anyone who believes that research published by Quasitum has not been carried out in line with these principles should raise their concerns with the relevant editor, or email journal@mpu.ac.in

    Concerns will be addressed by following COPE guidelines where possible.