Anima's ethics statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal.
Anima is committed to upholding high ethical principles of publication, and against all forms of academic disintegration practices such as plagiarism and other publication malpractice.
Publication and Authorship
Submitted manuscripts will be subjected to double-blind peer-review process Anima’s expert reviewers.
The factors of consideration in the review process are: (1) relevance; (2) soundness; (3) significance; (4) originality; (5) readability, and (6) academic language quality.
Possible decisions include: (1) acceptance; (2) acceptance with revisions; or (3) rejection.
There is no guarantee that a revised submitted manuscript will be accepted.
Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
Manuscript acceptance is constrained by legal requirements such as regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
No research can be included in more than one publication.
Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work and has not previously been published elsewhere or currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
Authors must participate in the peer review process and provide subsequent retractions or corrections of mistakes.
All Authors mentioned in the manuscript must have significantly contributed to the research, with each Authors’ contribution listed in the manuscript.
All data in the paper must be real and authentic.
Authors must notify the Editors of any Conflicts of Interest and Funding.
Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript in References.
Authors must report any errors discovered in their published manuscript to the Editors.
Reviewers must keep manuscript-related information confidential as privileged information.
Reviews must be conducted objectively and views must be expressed clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the Authors and any Reference-related problems or discrepancies.
Reviewers must inform the Editorial Team regarding any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper.
Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which there are potential conflicts of interest resulting relationships or connections with any individuals or institutions related to the papers.
Editors have the responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article while also being responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication by guaranteeing the quality of manuscripts and integrity of the academic record.
Editors must always consider the authors and readers when attempting to improve the publication.
Editors must publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
Editors must have a clear picture of a research’s funding sources and potential conflicts of interest.
Editors must base their decisions on, among others, the papers’: (1) importance; (2) originality; (3) clarity; and (4) relevance.
Editors must not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of other editors without proper and clear reason or argument.
Editors must preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
Editors must ensure that all research materials published conform to the accepted ethical guidelines.
Editors must act if they suspect misconduct, on both published and unpublished manuscripts, and reasonably persist in obtaining a resolution.
Editors must reject papers only with proper and clear proof of misconduct.
Editors must not allow any conflicts of interest between any members of Anima.
Any published manuscript will be subject to retraction if:
There is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct or honest error.
Findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification (proven to be a case of redundant publication).
The published manuscript constitutes plagiarism.
The published manuscript reports unethical research
The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
The Editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to Anima should be published.
The Editor may be guided by the policies of Anima's Editorial Board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
The Editor may confer with other Editors or Reviewers in making this decision.
An Editor at any time evaluate Manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the Authors.
The Editor and any Editorial Staff must not disclose any information about a submitted Manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding Author, Reviewers, Potential Reviewers, other Editorial Advisers, and the Publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted Manuscript must not be used in an Editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author.