Publication Ethics Statement

Nanofabrication is the member of  Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and will pursue cases of suspected research and publication misconduct (e.g. falsification, unethical experimentation, plagiarism, inappropriate image manipulation, redundant publication). For further information about COPE, please see the website for COPE at https://publicationethics.org/.

Originality of work

The contents of articles must be original and have not been published, submitted, or under consideration elsewhere. Innovation, originality, authenticity and accuracy must be important features of research articles. Our journals receive different types of research papers including original articles, reviews, short communications, technical reports and letters to editors. Each type of article has a special format and the submission must follow the guidelines that are on every journal website. The journal will not change any information after publishing unless the changes are required based on the publication ethics. Submitted articles must adhere to the instructions that every journal has elaborated. It is crucial that the submitted articles are within the designated scopes of journals; the subjects of each journal will be carefully examined by editors in chief.

Roles and users in Nanofabrication

Authorship

Everyone who has made notable contributions should be recognized as co-authors. Those who have been involved in specific significant aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. This approach ensures transparency about who is accountable for the integrity of the content.

Authors included in an article must meet all the following criteria:

• Made a substantial contribution to research, whether in the content, study design, execution, data collection, analysis, and interpretation or all these areas.
• Have prepared, written, substantially revised, or critically reviewed the paper
• Reviewed and agreed on all versions of the article and journals before submission, during revision, the final version accepted for publication, and any significant changes at the proofing stage.
• Take responsibility and be accountable for the contents of the article and any questions raised about the accuracy or integrity of the published work.
• Any changes in authorship before or after publication must be agreed upon by all authors, including those being added or removed. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to obtain confirmation from all co-authors and to provide a full explanation of why the change was necessary. But we recommend authors read our rules about Authorship changes.

Changes to authorship

As a general rule, extensive changes to the authorship of an article are not permitted. During submission of the original and revised versions of the paper, the corresponding author takes responsibility that all persons listed on the paper should be authors (are eligible for authorship per the criteria described above). Extensive changes to the author list will be investigated on a case-by-case basis, and if it cannot be ascertained why an extensive change has taken place, the paper may be rejected on that basis. 

Authorship changes on submission of a revised version of a paper: Depending on the nature of the revisions asked for in decision letters sent to authors, new author(s) might be added to a revised version of a paper, particularly if new experimental work has been requested as part of the peer-review process, and if the contributions of previously unnamed persons now merit authorship listing on the revised manuscript (criteria for authorship described above). In the event of the addition of authors at revision, the author contribution paragraph at the end of the manuscript must be updated to reflect what the newly added authors contributed to the paper.

If any authors are being removed from a revised paper, then it should be clear why that author has been removed, and written confirmation should be obtained from all authors (including the author who has been removed) confirming that they are aware of and agree with the removal of the author.

 We do not support the addition or removal of authors after acceptance and Proofreading.

However, if a change in authorship is required after the publication of the article, this will be amended via a post-publication notice or erratum. Any changes in authorship must comply with our criteria for authorship, and requests for significant changes to the authorship list after the article has been accepted may be rejected if clear reasons and evidence of author contributions cannot be provided.

If an author’s affiliation changes between the time the research is conducted or the paper is written and the time of publication, the author’s current affiliation should be listed, and where appropriate, the previous affiliation acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section at the copy-editing stage.

Misrepresentation of affiliation is a form of misconduct and the journal will deal with such cases by contacting all relevant institutions to assist with our investigation.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. Once submitted, the order cannot be changed without the written consent of all the contributors.

Contribution Details

 Contributors should describe the contributions made by each of them to the manuscript. The description should be divided into categories such as concept, design, definition of intellectual content, literature search experimental studies, data collection and analysis, statistical analysis, manuscript preparation, editing, and manuscript review. Ghost and false authorship are considered misconduct.

Images and Figures

Authors should include images and figures in their articles only if they are relevant and add significant value to the work being reported. Please avoid adding content of this type that is purely illustrative and does not contribute to the scholarly work.

As part of the Author Publishing Agreement, you must obtain written permission to include any material in your article that is owned and copyrighted by a third party. This includes, but is not limited to, proprietary text, illustrations, tables, data, audio, video, film stills, screenshots, musical notation, and any supplemental material.

Authors should be mindful of any cultural sensitivities or restrictions related to images included in their manuscripts. For instance, images of human remains or deceased individuals may be restricted in some cultures, and authors should follow appropriate ethical guidelines, considering the views and approval processes of the affiliated communities.

Editorship

• The Editor-in-Chief (EIC) is responsible for determining which articles submitted to the journal should be published. This decision is made in consultation with board members and based on reviewer recommendations while adhering to legal requirements such as those related to libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
• Editors are tasked with ensuring that the peer review process is conducted fairly, without bias, and promptly.
• The journal has established policies to guarantee an unbiased review process, even for submissions from editorial board members. Editorial decisions are made independently of the manuscript’s origin, including the authors’ nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, or religion.
• Editors also encourage reviewers to address ethical concerns and potential misconduct in submissions, such as unethical research design or inappropriate data manipulation. Reviewers should remain vigilant for redundant publication and plagiarism. All reviewer comments should be shared with authors in full unless they include offensive language. The contributions of reviewers to the journal are regularly acknowledged.
• Finally, editors must take all reasonable measures to ensure the quality of the published material, recognizing that different sections of the journal may have varying aims and standards.
• If one of the editors such as the editor in chief, or managing editor tends to submit a paper in the journals, his/ her paper must be managed or peer-reviewed without the authors’ interference and unbiasedly by reviewers assigned by other editors.

Reviewers

• Reviewers must keep the research papers confidential and are not permitted to share or publish any content from the manuscripts.
• They are required to report any unethical practices found in manuscripts, such as double submission, duplication, or plagiarism, to the editors.
• If a manuscript presents a conflict of interest for a reviewer, they are ethically required to decline the review process.
• Reviewers should submit their comments within the specified deadlines after accepting the editors’ invitation. If they are unable to meet the deadlines, they must promptly inform the editors.
• Reviewers are expected to evaluate papers impartially while adhering to the journal’s policies.
• Reviewers are prohibited from directly contacting authors regarding the manuscripts under review.

Plagiarism and Misconduct

Nanofabrication is the member of COPE community published regarding possible misconduct. As the primary goal of this journal is the integrity of research content, people involved in publishing a paper must avoid unethical issues and misconduct. So, we are committed to protecting the authenticity, accuracy, and reliability of the content published by our journals. Therefore, apart from the editorial process in which the content of papers is validated, the iThenticate and Turnitin software is applied to check similarities.

There are different facets of plagiarism and misconduct detected by both the publisher and editors and even reviewers.

Passages quoted or closely paraphrased from other authors (or from the submitting authors’ own published work) must be identified as quotations or paraphrases, and the sources of the quoted or paraphrased material must be acknowledged. The use of unacknowledged sources will be construed as plagiarism.

The review process will be halted immediately if any manuscript contains plagiarized material. Other examples of Violation of publication ethics (but are not limited to) are

• Affiliation misrepresentation
• Breaches in copyright/use of third-party material without appropriate permissions
• Citation manipulation
• Duplicate submission/publication
• “Ethics dumping”
• Image or data manipulation/fabrication
• Peer review manipulation
• Ghost and false authorship
• Text-recycling/self-plagiarism
• Undisclosed competing interests
• Unethical research

Conflicts of Interest

Incompatible aims and concerns can result in wrong judgments and decisions; therefore, authors must disclose all funding, financial and non-financial support and interests. Lack of transparency in revealing profits and financial resources of research can be considered misconduct. Likewise, it is essential that authors clearly state their affiliations and organizational dependency which might cause contradictions. People who are involved in the submission, and peer-reviewing process must consider the significance of conflicts of interest. Reviewers and editors are not excluded. Reviewers must decline manuscripts in which they might share the same interest. If reviewers or editors are in the peer-reviewing process and they identify that they might share the same interest, they have to inform the publisher or editor-in-chief.

Examples of conflicts of interest that should be declared are (but are not limited to):

• employment (where you will receive financial gain)
• consultancy (where you will receive financial gain)
• personal relationships
• academic competition

COI for editors

All Editors-in-Chief, editorial board members and  the publisher staff are required to submit a declaration of any interests if the interest conditions change. This obligation extends to the interests of their spouse, committed partner, or dependent children if those interests could be reasonably perceived as a conflict by an outside observer. Editors-in-Chief disclose these directly, while board members report them to their Editor-in-Chief.

Furthermore, any invited authors who are not on the editorial board (such as guest contributors) must be informed of these conflict-of-interest rules before they begin writing. They are required to confirm in writing that they have no such conflicts that could affect their ability to produce fair and objective content.

Confidentiality

It is evident that the editors and the journal staff will access various kinds of information and data that we are responsible for protecting. Nanofabrication completely preserved users’ metadata and information.

Likewise, editors and reviewers are committed to preserving authors’ information and their research content until possible work publication. They are not allowed to reveal or use the authors’ information and scholarly content without the authors’ permission. Editors also have to keep the confidentiality of reviewers’ identities. However, to uphold the transparency of peer-review policies, reviewers can consent to share their comments within the system.

Corrections (Erratum), expressions of concern, and retractions

Sometimes after an article has been published it may be necessary to make a change to the published article.

This will be done after careful consideration by the Editors to ensure any necessary changes are done in accordance with guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (https://publicationethics.org/).

Any necessary changes will be accompanied by a post-publication notice (erratum)which will be permanently linked to the original article. This can be in the form of a Correction notice, an Expression of Concern, or a Retraction. The purpose of this mechanism of making changes that are permanent and transparent is to ensure the integrity of the scholarly record.

However, in cases of major corrections, the original article will remain unchanged, while the corrected version will also be published. Both the original and corrected versions (erratum) will be linked to each other. A statement indicating the reason for the major change to the article will also be published.

A Retraction notice will be issued where a major error (e.g. in the analysis or methods) invalidates the conclusions in the article, or where research misconduct or publication misconduct has taken place (e.g. research without required ethical approvals, fabricated data, manipulated images, plagiarism, duplicate publication, manipulated peer reviewing process). Authors and institutions may also request the retraction of their articles if their reasons meet the criteria for retraction.

To help minimize the impact of incorrect or misleading publications, all efforts will be made to issue retractions as soon as possible.

Citations

Research and non-research articles must cite relevant, timely, and verified literature (peer-reviewed, where appropriate) to support any claims made in the article. You must avoid excessive and inappropriate self-citation or pre arrangements among author groups to inappropriately cite each other’s work, as this can be considered a form of misconduct called citation manipulation. If you’re the author of a non-research article (e.g. a Review or Opinion) you should ensure the references you cite are relevant and provide a fair and balanced overview of the current state of research or scholarly work on the topic.

Use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in writing

Transparency

Disclosure Requirement: The use of AI technologies for content generation, editing, or writing must be made clear in the work.

Example: “The author used [AI tool] to assist with [specific task].”

Authors that use AI to create content are subject to plagiarism law

Prohibition of Unacknowledged Use: Academic misconduct claims may arise if the use of AI is not disclosed.

Al is not considered or cannot be listed as an author in creating content, only humans can take responsibility for generating content.

Permitted Uses

AI tools can assist with specific aspects of the review process, such as:

• Grammar and Syntax Checks: Identifying language problems or suggesting clearer phrasing.
• Summarization: Highlighting arguments, or areas of concern in the work.
• Plagiarism Detection: recognizing poorly paraphrased material using plagiarism-checking tools.
• Fact-checking: Verifying factual accuracy or checking references.
• Formatting Checks: Checking the journal style and guidelines

Some applications of AI in review are frequently limited:

• Assigning the Review: It is often forbidden to let AI perform the entire review or produce comprehensive evaluations.
• Evaluative Judgments: AI shouldn’t decide on subjective matters like assessing the novelty of a study.
• Assessing an argument’s relevance or depth.
• Choosing whether to accept, reject, or make the necessary changes to the work.
• Sharing Confidential Information: If the reviewed information is sent for processing, AI tools that store user inputs may unintentionally violate confidentiality agreements.
• Al might be biased and it is possible to misinterpret complex technical content.

While AI can enhance the efficiency and precision of reviewing academic work, its role should remain supportive and secondary to the reviewer’s expertise and ethical responsibilities. Full transparency, compliance with confidentiality requirements, and adherence to professional guidelines are essential to maintaining trust and integrity in the review process.

For more details about the ethical policy of  Eurasia Academic Publishing Group (EAPG) please check here.

Nanofabrication uses the Attribution-No-Derivatives 4.0 International licence (CC BY-ND 4.0): https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/

Nanofabrication is self-funded by editorial services provided to academic organizations

The journal follows Sherpa/Romeo's  archiving policy.

Eurasia Academic Publishing Group (EAPG)

The EAPG is committed to keeping all content and history of manuscripts confidential.

The EAPG is obliged to answers users’ queries regarding the technical problems of the site.

The EAPG shall back up and store the data archive of all manuscripts.

The EAPG must provide articles with appropriate proofreading and layout.

If an article has to be retracted, the EAPG is obliged to inform all indexing and abstracting databases that include the journal's contents.