Section APublication and Authorship

1. All submitted papers are subject to a strict peer-review process by at least two international reviewers who are experts in the area of the particular paper.
2. The review process is conducted as a blind peer review.
3. Factors taken into account during review include relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language quality.
4. Possible editorial decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
5. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
6. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
7. Paper acceptance is constrained by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
8. No research can be included in more than one publication simultaneously.

Section BAuthors’ Responsibilities

1. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
2. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not been previously published elsewhere.
3. Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.
4. Authors are required to actively participate in the peer review process.
5. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of any identified mistakes.
6. All authors listed in the paper must have contributed significantly to the research.
7. Authors must state that all data presented in the paper are real, authentic, and accurate.
8. Authors must notify the Editors of any potential conflicts of interest.
9. Authors must properly cite and identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
10. Authors must promptly report any discovered errors in their published paper to the Editors.

Section CReviewers’ Responsibilities

1. Reviewers must keep all information regarding manuscripts confidential and treat them as privileged information.
2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism directed at the author.
3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments and evidence.
4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
5. Reviewers must alert the Editor-in-Chief to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
6. Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions.

Section DEditors’ Responsibilities

1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to accept or reject an article.
2. Editors are responsible for the overall content and quality of the publication.
3. Editors should continuously consider the needs of authors and readers when seeking to improve the publication.
4. Editors should guarantee the quality of papers and maintain the integrity of the academic record.
5. Editors should publish errata, corrigenda, or make necessary corrections promptly.
6. Editors should maintain transparency regarding research funding sources.
7. Editors should base decisions solely on the paper’s importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope.
8. Editors should not reverse previous editorial decisions without compelling academic reasons.
9. Editors must preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
10. Editors should ensure all published research conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
11. Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain of its integrity.
12. Editors must act promptly if misconduct is suspected (published or unpublished) and pursue resolution.
13. Editors should not reject papers based on unverified suspicions; solid proof of misconduct is required.
14. Editors must manage and prevent conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and editorial board members.

PolicyRetraction Policy

The papers published in JOURNAL NEW HOPE will be considered for retraction if:

1. There is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, whether due to misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error).
2. The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission, or justification (redundant/duplicate publication).
3. The manuscript constitutes plagiarism.
4. The paper reports unethically conducted research.