MJS strictly adheres to the Code of Conduct established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The publisher, editors, editorial board, reviewers, and authors must comply with the specific publication ethics guidelines as stated below:

Publisher
The Faculty of Science at the University of Malaya, as the publisher of the Malaysian Journal of Science (MJS), bears the responsibility of upholding the scholarly integrity of the journal. The primary role of the publisher is to facilitate effective communication among all stakeholders involved in the publication process. This is essential for the sharing, discussing, and disseminating high-quality scientific research using best practices, thereby advancing knowledge and research within the journal's scope. The communication process among authors, reviewers, and editors must strictly adhere to these guidelines to ensure that they can effectively and ethically fulfil their roles.

The open-access model system under the Faculty of Science financially supports the Malaysian Journal of Science (MJS). Editorial decision-making should not be influenced by publishing fees or waiver status under any circumstances. The Faculty of Science at Universiti Malaya also actively participates in educating the scientific community by providing advice on publishing ethics standards, particularly for early career researchers such that the knowledge of the best practices of the publication process is common knowledge and widely embraced by the scientific community.

If the Editors, Section Editors, or Editorial Board members are the authors of the submitted manuscripts, or if they have a personal interest in the manuscripts, the peer review process must be conducted independently, without any involvement of the relevant editor or their research group.

The integrity of the scholarly record is maintained, and irregularities are avoided by following standard procedures throughout the publication process, as illustrated in the diagram below.

After the authors submit their manuscripts, the documents will be checked for plagiarism using Turnitin to meet the journal guidelines (Only manuscripts with a similarity index of less than 15% will be processed to the next stage). The Editor-in-Chief, along with the assistant manager of the journal, will review the scope of the manuscripts. If the manuscripts do not meet these criteria, they will be rejected. Otherwise, they will be passed on to the relevant Editors or Section Editors within the journal's scope.

The Editors will carefully select at least two reviewers to assess the manuscripts, taking into consideration their originality, technical quality, clarity, and relevance to the field. MJS implements a double-blind reviewing process to ensure fairness. Reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive feedback, including recommendations for revision, rejection, or acceptance of the manuscripts. The Editors or Section Editors will then decide based on the reviewers' evaluations, considering the journal's scope and objectives. After the manuscripts are satisfactorily revised, they are accepted by the Editors or Section Editors. The time frame for revision will depend on the nature of the manuscript corrections. Effective for the issue of 2024 onwards, the authors are given 45 days to complete the minor corrections. In the case of major corrections, the authors are given 90 days period to complete the corrections. Accepted manuscripts will undergo copyediting and proofreading by the journal assistant manager before being published on the OJS online platform. If authors request some corrections after acceptance, the corrections of the manuscripts have to be reviewed by the editors or section editors which may cause delay in the publication stage.

Editors, Section Editors and Editorial Boards
The editors or section editors must make independent evaluations of the quality of the manuscripts solely based on the academic merit of the manuscript without bias to race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority or institutional affiliation of the author(s).

Editors must appoint at least two reviewers working in the same scope as the submitted manuscript to evaluate the quality and content of the manuscripts.

Editors can reject the submission based on the failure to comply with the scope of the journal or failing the similarity index of 15% as stated in the authors' guidelines.

All information contained in the submitted manuscript must be kept confidential and should not be disclosed to any party, except when professional advice is required. Information of the submitted can only be disclosed after it has been accepted for publication.

An Editor must not use unpublished information in their research without the express written consent of the author.

In case where the authors of the submitted manuscripts consist of the Editor, Section Editors or Editorial board of MJS, the authority and responsibility for the manuscript will be delegated to another unrelated member of the editorial board or a member of its section editors.

In scholarly publishing, it is essential for editorial decisions to be transparent to uphold fairness and accountability. Authors must be openly communicated to regarding acceptance or rejection, rather than having these decisions concealed behind the anonymity of peer reviewers.

If errors are found in a published manuscript, editors must report and correct them. The person who identified the error or the authors must write the report and make the correction.

The Editorial Board should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. They shall conduct a proper and fair investigation into ethical complaints as practised by  Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE) and stated in the Section of Plagiarism and Malpractices policies.

Editors and Section Editors are prohibited from using Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies to aid in evaluating, writing reports, and making decisions regarding submitted manuscripts. MJS adheres to the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on the use of AI-assisted technologies in the publication process, as outlined in the Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies section.

Authors
The authors must ensure that the submitted manuscripts contain original works, including the research performed, data collected and used, analysis, discussions and conclusions derived from the works to allow other scientists to reproduce the observations reported. If the works and/or others have been used, they must be properly cited and acknowledged in the manuscripts.

Plagiarism is unethical and not tolerated in scholarly publishing. Authors must follow MJS's plagiarism policy, which requires that manuscripts have a similarity index of less than 15% according to Turnitin to proceed to the next publication stage.

It is not acceptable to falsify or fabricate data, manipulate images, duplicate publication of the authors' own work without proper citation, or misappropriate the work. These actions are all considered unethical practices. Any cases of ethical misconduct are taken very seriously and will be dealt with in accordance with the COPE guidelines as stated in the Section of Malpractice policy.

The corresponding authors are responsible for ensuring that all co-authors' names, affiliations and email addresses are accurately included in the submitted manuscripts. Co-authors are individuals who have made significant contributions at all stages of the work, including research ideas and design, funding acquisition, experimental work, data analysis, and formulation of discussions and conclusions. Additionally, all authors are required to declare any conflicts of interest in the submitted manuscripts.

If the author finds a major error or inaccuracy in a submitted manuscript at any time, they should inform the editor. If the editor or publisher is informed by a third party that a published work contains a major error, the author must promptly retract or correct the paper, or provide evidence of the paper's accuracy to the editor.

Authors are required to ensure that any studies involving animals comply with animal ethics and welfare guidelines. All experimental animals must be handled and used in adherence to international, national, or local regulations. The manuscript must include a statement of compliance from the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) as the first item in the materials and methods section. If necessary, the editor or reviewers may ask for the official IACUC approval number. The MJS reserves the right to reject any manuscripts that involve unethical or improper conduct in animal studies.

Authors should refrain from using generative AI and AI-assisted technologies for analyzing and drawing conclusions in their research work as it may impact the originality, accuracy, and biases of the reported research. However, these technologies can be utilized to enhance readability and language in the writing process of manuscripts. In such cases, authors are required to disclose the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the manuscript. MJS follows the policy on generative AI and AI-assisted technologies developed by Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE).

Reviewers
Reviewers are required to assess submitted manuscripts objectively and fairly, without any bias, and while respecting the intellectual independence of the authors. The judgement must not consist of any personal criticism of the authors.  Reviewers should provide well-founded arguments to support their evaluation, enabling the editors and authors to comprehend the reasoning behind the judgment and to respond during the manuscript revision.

Received manuscripts designated for review must be handled with the utmost confidentiality. It is vital that these documents are not disclosed or deliberated on with anyone unless explicitly authorized by the editor.

Reviewers should not have any conflicts of interest related to the research, the authors, or the research funding. If reviewers feel that they have a conflict of interest or are not qualified to judge, they should notify the editors and return the manuscripts.

Reviewers should bring attention to relevant works by other scientists that the authors may have overlooked and suggest their inclusion in the manuscript. Any suggestion for inclusion must be based on genuine scientific reasons and not on the intention of manipulating publication-related metrics for journals, editors, or reviewers.

If a reviewer feels that he or she is unable to complete the review of the manuscript within the stipulated time, they should communicate this to the editor. This will allow the editor to send the manuscript to another reviewer.

Reviewers are prohibited from uploading submitted manuscripts to any generative AI or AI-assisted technology platform for the purpose of creating review reports based on the submitted manuscripts. This is because doing so may lead to incorrect, incomplete, or biased interpretations and conclusions. MJS follows the policy on generative AI and AI-assisted technologies set by the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE).

Transfer of copyrights
MJS accepts manuscripts that have not been published elsewhere and are not under consideration for publication by other print or electronic media. The authors agree to transfer the copyright to MJS editorial office. However, it can be reprinted with a proper acknowledgement that it was published in MJS.

Plagiarism Policy
Plagiarism is the act of using unattributed text, data, images, or intellectual properties and presenting them as one's own without proper acknowledgement.

MJS requires authors to check their submitted manuscripts using Turnitin. Only manuscripts with a similarity index of less than 15%, verified by the assistant manager of MJS, will be forwarded for further processing in the publication process.

MJS adopts a policy that defines and applies the guidelines provided by the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE) for suspected plagiarism in a submitted manuscript. For more information, refer to COPE guidance at publicationethics.org.

If plagiarism is discovered during the review process, the following steps will be taken:

1. When plagiarism is suspected, a reviewer must report the case to the MJS editor. The editor will then form a committee from the editorial board members to gather all evidence of the case.
2. The level of plagiarism is evaluated and classified as clear plagiarism, copying the work of authors, or minor copying of short phrases. In the case of clear plagiarism, the editor will notify the authors in writing, providing an authorship statement and evidence of plagiarism.
3. If the authors cannot give a satisfactory explanation or admit to plagiarism, then the manuscripts will be retracted from MJS, and the affiliation of the authors will be notified by MJS. In cases where the authors can provide satisfactory explanations, such as an honest error or unclear instructions, then the authors will be instructed to rephrase the copied statements if necessary.
4. The editorial board will communicate with the reviewer and officially inform the outcome of the investigation to the reviewer.

 

Malpractice Policy
The publisher of MJS highly values ethical conduct and integrity within the academic publishing domain. We are committed to addressing any misconduct or malpractice that arises with an appropriate, fair policy for all parties involved.

Malpractice in journal publishing is conduct that directly violates established ethical principles and has the potential to compromise the integrity of scholarly research and the credibility of published findings. Upholding ethical standards in research is imperative, encompassing the avoidance of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, and manipulation of research data, ensuring proper authorship attribution and disclosing conflicts of interest, respecting copyrights and intellectual property rights, and following ethical guidelines in research.

All parties involved in the publication process are required to promptly report any suspicions of malpractice related to the submitted or published manuscript of MJS. This proactive reporting is crucial to enable the publisher and editors to take decisive and appropriate action. An impartial investigation conducted by the editorial board will effectively assess the validity of the allegations within a specific time frame and will involve several standard practices to ensure fairness, confidentiality, and thoroughness.

1. An initial investigation is conducted to determine if the allegation is valid and constitutes malpractice.
2. The editorial board members will collect all relevant evidence and conduct interviews with the complainant, the accused and the witness.
3. The investigation will be kept confidential to protect the reputation of all parties involved. Both the complainant and the accused will be treated fairly, and the complainant has the choice to remain anonymous.
4. The editorial board is tasked with preparing a thorough report outlining the findings, conclusions, and recommendations. These must be supported by relevant authorities within the MJS publisher.
5. If misconduct is substantiated, decisive action will be taken, including retracting the implicated publication, notifying relevant parties (authors, affiliated institutions, funding bodies, etc.), and imposing disciplinary actions and other sanctions.
6. Correction or editorial expression of concern will be issued for publications affected by minor malpractice that do not meet the threshold for retraction.

Instances of malpractice will be meticulously documented and openly communicated to relevant stakeholders. The MJS publisher is firmly dedicated to proactively preventing misconduct in academic publishing. This commitment involves providing guidance, valuable resources, and impactful educational initiatives to promote ethical best practices among authors, reviewers, and editors. Our policy strictly adheres to the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and undertakes regular rigorous review and refinement to ensure alignment with the evolving best practices and standards in academic publishing.

Animal Ethics
Authors are required to ensure that any studies involving animals comply with animal ethics and welfare guidelines. All experimental animals must be handled and used in adherence to international, national, or local regulations. The manuscript must include a statement of compliance from the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) as the first item in the materials and methods section. If necessary, the editor or reviewers may ask for the official IACUC approval number. The MJS reserves the right to reject any manuscripts that involve unethical or improper conduct in animal studies.

Generative AI and AI-assisted Technology
MJS follows the policy on generative AI and AI-assisted technologies developed by the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE). Please refer to : Authorship and AI tools | COPE: Committee on Publication Ethics

The main points are listed as follows:

1. The responsibility for the submitted work, conflicts of interest, copyrights, and license agreements cannot be handled by AI tools. Therefore, AI tools should not be listed as authors for the submitted manuscripts.
2. Authors must disclose in the Materials and Methods section of their submitted manuscripts how they used AI tools and specify the particular tool employed.
3. Authors are fully responsible for the manuscript including any part produced by AI tool.
4. The use of AI in the publication process should be transparent, fair, and non-discriminatory and are mainly for improving language and readability of the manuscripts.
5. Reviewers are prohibited from uploading submitted manuscripts to any generative AI or AI-assisted technology platform for the purpose of creating review reports based on the submitted manuscripts. This is because doing so may lead to incorrect, incomplete, or biased interpretations and conclusions.
6. Editors and Section Editors are prohibited from using Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies to aid in evaluating, writing reports, and making decisions regarding submitted manuscripts except for improving the language and readability of the report.

The following guidelines are designed to uphold the integrity and ethical standards of scholarly publishing, while recognizing the increasing influence of AI in research and publications. These guidelines will undergo regular review to keep pace with advancements in AI technology and its expanding role in the publication process.