Privacy Statement

IJAPLett Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.

IJAPLett is a peer-reviewed open-access journal. It adopts a CC 4.0 license.

The reviewing process includes two blind reviewers with two positive decisions to accept the submitted manuscript. Plagiarism is checked and should not exceed 20%. The use of AI within the whole manuscript should be exposed and not exceed 5%. Using AI to generate data, results, images, and similar materials is not accepted. Using AI to modify text and to generate figures, charts, diagrams, routes, and similar materials is accepted at an allowed level.

Authors are requested to pay for reviewing and publication of their manuscripts submitted to IJAPLett. The reviewing and publication fees start from 40000 Iraqi dinars for 4 printed pages.

Authors should sign the copyright form upon the acceptance of their manuscripts to transfer the copyrights to IJAPLett.

 

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Iraqi Journal of Applied Physics Letters (IJAPLett), published and sponsored by American Quality for Scientific Publishing, Inc., strictly adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for journal editors and publishers.

All parties involved in the publication process authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher are expected to comply with these ethical principles. The following summary highlights key responsibilities; however, readers are encouraged to consult the official COPE documents for full details.

 

Responsibilities of Editors

Editorial Independence and Fair Evaluation

Editors assess submitted manuscripts solely on the basis of their scientific merit, including originality, validity, clarity, and significance to the journal’s scope. Decisions are made without discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, citizenship, religious or political beliefs, or institutional affiliation. Editorial decisions are entirely independent of governmental or external influence. The Editor-in-Chief retains full authority over the content and timing of publication.

Confidentiality
Editors and editorial staff must treat all submissions as strictly confidential. Manuscript information is shared only with individuals directly involved in the review and publication process (e.g., corresponding authors, reviewers, and the publisher).

Conflict of Interest and Disclosure

Editors must not exploit unpublished data or ideas from submitted manuscripts for personal gain. They must recuse themselves from handling any manuscript in which a conflict of interest exists due to competitive, collaborative, or personal relationships with the authors or affiliated institutions. In such cases, another qualified editor will manage the review process.

Editorial Decisions and Peer Review

Each submitted paper is evaluated through a minimum of two independent peer reviews conducted by experts in the relevant field. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision, taking into account reviewer feedback, the paper’s contribution to the field, and adherence to legal and ethical standards regarding plagiarism, defamation, and copyright.

Ethical Investigations

In cooperation with the publisher, editors are committed to addressing all allegations of research or publication misconduct, even if discovered years after publication. Investigations follow COPE flowcharts, and if misconduct is confirmed, appropriate corrective measures (e.g., correction, retraction, or expression of concern) will be issued.

 

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Role in the Editorial Process

Peer reviewers play a vital role in maintaining scientific integrity by assisting editors in decision-making and helping authors improve their manuscripts. All scholars who benefit from the peer-review system are encouraged to contribute to it responsibly.

Timeliness
Reviewers who lack expertise in the manuscript’s subject or cannot complete a timely review must promptly inform the editors and decline the invitation, ensuring that alternative reviewers can be assigned.

Confidentiality
All manuscripts under review are confidential documents. They must not be shared, discussed, or used for personal purposes. Reviewers who decline invitations are equally bound by this confidentiality.

Objectivity and Constructive Feedback

Reviews must be objective, evidence-based, and clearly articulated. Personal criticism of authors is unacceptable. Comments should aid in improving the manuscript’s quality.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers must identify missing or incorrect citations and alert the editors to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and other known works.

Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must declare any financial, collaborative, or personal conflicts of interest that may bias their assessment and should decline to review such manuscripts. Unpublished data or ideas obtained through peer review may not be used for personal research or advantage.

 

Responsibilities of Authors

Accuracy and Integrity of Reporting

Authors must provide an accurate and objective account of their research. The manuscript should include sufficient detail and references to allow replication. Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate reporting is unethical and unacceptable.

Data Availability

Authors may be asked to submit their raw data for editorial review and should ensure its availability to other researchers for at least ten years post-publication, where feasible, while respecting confidentiality and legal constraints.

Originality and Plagiarism

All submissions must represent original work. When using others’ ideas or words, proper citation is mandatory. All forms of plagiarism—whether verbatim copying, paraphrasing without attribution, or misappropriating others’ results—constitute unethical conduct.

Multiple or Redundant Publication

Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously or republish previously published work. Secondary publication may be acceptable in limited cases (e.g., translations or guidelines) with mutual consent from both journals and proper citation of the original source.

Authorship Criteria

Only those who made substantial contributions to the research design, execution, or interpretation, and who approved the final manuscript, should be listed as authors. Individuals who contributed in a supporting capacity (e.g., technical or editorial help) should be acknowledged but not listed as authors. The corresponding author bears responsibility for ensuring all eligible contributors are properly included and informed.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

Authors must disclose all financial and non-financial conflicts of interest that might influence the interpretation of their work. Funding sources, institutional affiliations, and any potential bias must be transparently reported within the manuscript.

Acknowledgement of Sources

All data, ideas, or statements derived from other works must be properly cited. Information obtained through personal communication or peer review must not be used without explicit written permission from the source.

Ethical Standards for Human and Animal Research

Manuscripts describing research involving humans or animals must include statements confirming ethical approval by the relevant institutional committees and compliance with national and international guidelines. Authors must clearly identify any potential hazards associated with chemicals or procedures used and confirm that informed consent was obtained from human participants.

Participation in Peer Review

Authors are expected to cooperate fully during the review and revision process, responding systematically to reviewers’ comments and resubmitting revised versions within the specified deadlines.

Correction of Errors

If significant errors or inaccuracies are discovered after publication, authors are obligated to promptly notify the editors or publisher and cooperate in issuing corrections or retractions as appropriate.

 

Responsibilities of the Publisher

Addressing Misconduct

In cases of alleged or proven research misconduct, data fabrication, or plagiarism, the publisher, in collaboration with the editors, will investigate and take necessary corrective actions. These may include the publication of an erratum, clarification, or retraction, as appropriate. The publisher and editors take all reasonable steps to prevent unethical research or publication practices.

Archiving and Accessibility

The publisher is committed to ensuring the long-term preservation and accessibility of all published content through secure digital archiving and partnerships with recognized repositories.

References
This statement is based on the COPE Code of Conduct and the Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and Publishers.