Publication Ethics

Through peer review and stringent ethical guidelines, the Menoufia Journal of Electronic Engineering Research (MJEER) is committed to maintaining high standards. The MJEER editors take seriously any violations of publishing ethics (such as plagiarism, fraudulent data use, and fake authorship claims). The workflow of the MJEER journal management system ensures a continuous monitoring of the quality of the publication system. MJEER follows the Code of Conduct of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and follows the COPE Flowcharts for Resolving Cases of Suspected Misconduct.

Submission

The submitted paper must neither be published nor be submitted for publication elsewhere. Violations of these rules will normally result in an immediate rejection of the submission without further review.

The MJEER editor is entitled to set suitable measures to maintain the reputation of the journal. These measures and editor decisions are based on the authors' responses. Penalties may include sending a letter of warning, imposing a ban on submissions for some time, or informing the author's superior about the misconduct.

The following initial checks are done at the publisher's office upon receiving a new submission:

  • Format and completeness.
  • The publication status.
  •  

Plagiarism

Papers submitted to MJEER must contain original material. An Initial Plagiarism Check is carried out for every manuscript submitted to MJEER. The Journal management system provides the MJEER with iThenticate—Similarity Check tool. A manuscript with a total "Similarity Index" of 20% or more will be rejected. 

Data Fabrication and Falsification

In case of Data fabrication/data falsification, Journal of Electronic Engineering Research (MJEER) strive to follow the guideline recommended by Committee On Publication Ethics (COPE) (http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines). Any allegations of violation to these guidelines are thoroughly investigated by a team of executive board of MJEER with a logical conclusion.

Recommended action by COPE for Data fabrication / data falsification:

Conflicts of Interest: Authors

To prevent the possibility of bias, authors should disclose all conflicts of interest pertinent to the work being considered (i.e. relationships, both financial and personal, that may interfere with the interpretation of the work).

All authors must be involved in (a) visualizing and designing or data analysis and interpretation; (b) writing or critically assessing the text for significant intellectual content; and (c) approving the final version.

Conflicts of Interest: Peer-Reviewers

The following situations are considered conflicts and should be avoided:

  • Co-authoring publications with at least one of the authors in the past 3 years
  • Being colleagues within the same section/department or similar organizational unit in the past 3 years
  • Supervising/having supervised the doctoral work of the author (s) or being supervised/having been supervised by the author(s)
  • Receiving professional or personal benefit resulting from the review
  • Having a personal relationship (e.g. family, close friend) with the author(s)
  • Having a direct or indirect financial interest in the paper being reviewed

Conflicts of Interest: Editors and Journal Staff

Editors who make final decisions about manuscripts must have no personal, professional, or financial involvement in any of the issues they might judge. Other members of the editorial staff, if they participate in editorial decisions, must provide editors with a current description of their financial interests (as they might relate to editorial judgments) and recuse themselves from any decisions in which a conflict of interest exists. Editorial staff must not use information gained through working with manuscripts for private gain. Editors should publish regular disclosure statements about potential conflicts of interest related to the commitments of journal staff.

For queries related to the journal, please contact: mjeer@el-eng.menofia.edu.eg