Publication Ethics and Research Misconduct Policy

Prestress Technology is dedicated to upholding the highest ethical standards in scholarly publishing. This policy is based on the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and applies to all parties involved in the publication process: authors, editors, peer reviewers, and the publisher. The full COPE guidelines are available at https://publicationethics.org.

1. Duties of Authors

• Authors must ensure that their submitted work is entirely original. Any use of the work or words of others must be appropriately cited or quoted.
• Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently.
• Authors should acknowledge all data sources used in the research and cite works that have influenced their research.
• Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.
• Authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

2. Duties of Editors

• The editor is responsible for deciding which submitted articles should be published.
• Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have competing interests.
• Editors must screen each manuscript for originality before sending it to reviewers.
• Editors must ensure that manuscript evaluation is free from bias related to gender, race, religion, nationality, etc.
• Editors must declare their own conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from manuscripts where they have financial conflicts, close personal relationships, or professional collaborations within the past 5 years.

3. Duties of Reviewers

• Reviewers must ensure authors have acknowledged all data sources and immediately notify the editor of any suspected plagiarism or redundant publication.
• Reviews must be conducted objectively with clear arguments.
• Reviewers must have no conflicts of interest with the research, authors, or funders.
• Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
• Reviewers must immediately notify the editor if they cannot meet the deadline.
• Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest upon receiving a review invitation and decline to review manuscripts where significant conflicts exist.

4. Duties of the Publisher

• Ensure good practice is maintained according to the above standards.
• Actively investigate allegations of publication misconduct both before and after publication.
• Reserve the right to contact the authors' institutions, funders, or regulatory bodies.
• Take measures to correct the scholarly record upon discovering conclusive evidence of misconduct, including issuing corrections or retractions.

5. Conflict of Interest Policy

Definition: A conflict of interest exists when professional judgment concerning a primary interest (such as the validity of research, integrity of peer review, or editorial decision-making) may be influenced by a secondary interest, which may be financial, personal, academic, political, or institutional.

Author Responsibilities: All authors must include a conflict of interest statement in their manuscript at the time of submission, placed before the reference list.

Editor Responsibilities: Editors must declare their own conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from handling manuscripts for which they have financial conflicts, close personal relationships, or professional collaborations within the past 5 years.

Reviewer Responsibilities: Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest immediately upon receiving a review invitation and decline to review manuscripts where significant conflicts exist.

6. Plagiarism and Research Misconduct Policy

The journal has a zero-tolerance policy toward plagiarism and research misconduct.

Definition of Research Misconduct includes but is not limited to: plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication (simultaneous submission), improper authorship.

Plagiarism Detection and Determination Criteria: The journal uses the CrossCheck "iThenticate" and other professional plagiarism detection tools to screen all submitted manuscripts. Detection is performed at various stages of the editorial and publication process.

Similarity Threshold: For manuscripts with a similarity rate of 10% or higher, the journal will submit the manuscript together with the source document to reviewers or the editorial board for further determination of the nature and form of repetition. The criteria for determining research misconduct include but are not limited to:

• Verbatim or near-verbatim copying of others' work
• Changing the type or form of others' work and presenting it as one's own
• Citing protected ideas, schemes, materials, or data without proper attribution or references
• Substantially identical content to previously published or publicly available work by the same or other authors, with only superficial changes and insufficient substantive progress
• Fabrication or falsification of research results, survey data, experimental data, or literature
• Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to this journal and other journals (duplicate submission)
• Disputes over authorship order or institutional affiliation

Actions:

Author Dispute Resolution: If an author disputes the journal's determination or action, they may submit a written request for reconsideration within 10 business days of receiving the notice (requests after this period will not be accepted). The editorial office will invite experts to re-evaluate the manuscript and will notify the author of the final decision within 30 business days.

Whistleblower Protection: The journal protects the rights of good-faith whistleblowers.

Record Retention: The journal will retain all investigation records for a minimum of 5 years.

7. Corrections, Retractions, and Post-Publication Discussions Policy

Corrections: Issued when an error is identified that affects the scientific integrity but does not invalidate the main findings.

Retractions: Issued in cases of major errors invalidating conclusions, plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication/falsification, or ethical violations.

Expressions of Concern: May be issued when there is inconclusive evidence of misconduct or when an ongoing investigation may take time.

Author Responsibilities: Authors who discover significant errors in their own published work have an obligation to promptly notify the journal editor.

Author-Initiated Withdrawal Provisions:

• After successful submission, if an author requests withdrawal for personal reasons, they must provide a written explanation to the editorial office.
• If the manuscript has passed review but has not yet entered the editing and typesetting stage, the author must complete an "Author Withdrawal Request Form".
• If the manuscript has entered the editing and typesetting stage, the author must complete a detailed "Author Withdrawal Request Form" and compensate the editorial office for actual expenses incurred during review, editing, and typesetting.
• If an author initiates withdrawal for personal reasons twice cumulatively, the journal will reject manuscripts submitted by that author (as first author or corresponding author) for 1 year.

8. Actions in Cases of Ethical Violations

Depending on the stage and severity of the violation, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

For Violations Discovered Before Publication:

• Immediate rejection of the manuscript
• Notification to all named authors of the reason for rejection
• Notification to the authors' institution (in cases of serious violations)
• Enhanced scrutiny for any future submissions from the same authors
• A 6 to 24-month suspension of the author's submission privileges depending on severity

For Violations Discovered After Publication:

• Issuance of a retraction or correction notice
• Notification to the authors' institution
• Notification to relevant funding agencies (where applicable)
• Enhanced scrutiny for any future submissions from the same authors

All actions are governed by the following principles: Actions are proportionate to the severity of the violation; all investigations and processes are strictly confidential; authors have the right to appeal within 30 days; all decisions are made in accordance with COPE guidelines.