Iranian Journal of Fisheries Sciences is not a member on Committee of Publication Ethics. Ethic statements of the Iranian Journal of Fisheries Sciences are based on COPE's (Committee on Publication Ethics) best practice guidelines for journal editors.
When an author submits a manuscript to IJFS, the manuscript should be original and has not been previously published or under review by other journals.
If the authors have used the work/and or words of others, it must be appropriately cited or quoted. The corresponding author is responsible for co-authors whether they have any conflict of interest to declare. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors are included on the article, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and have agreed to its submission to the Journal for its publication.
Any type of plagiarism is unacceptable and is considered unethical publishing behavior. Such manuscripts will be rejected. Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
The corresponding author has the right to withdraw the article at any stage prior to its publication in the journal.
The editor-in-chief has complete responsibility and authority to accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript based on the reviewers’ and relevant editor evaluation of the manuscript and policies of the journal editorial board.
Originality and quality of paper, clarity of presentation and relevance to publication's scope should be the only sole characteristics for accepting or rejecting any manuscript. Rejections should not be made based on suspicions. Editors should find out a solution for ethical issues and problems including conflict of authors regarding their published or unpublished papers.
That information pertaining manuscripts should be kept confidential. The editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher.
All manuscripts received for review should be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor-in-chief.
The reviewers should be experts in the corresponding field of research, and should be selected for their objectivity and scientific knowledge. The reviewer cannot be the author (authors) of the manuscript and scientist who has a conflict of interest (e.g. a supervisor and his/her subordinate, a scientific adviser and his/her student).
The reviewer should comment on any ethical concerns raised by the study, or any possible evidence of low standards of scientific conduct. The reviewer’s comments to the author should be constructive and professional.
The review should provide the editor the proper context and perspective to make a decision on acceptance (and/or revision) of the manuscript.
The peer-review process should be completed as soon as possible.