• ISSN 1001-1455  CN 51-1148/O3
  • EI、Scopus、CA、JST收录
  • 力学类中文核心期刊
  • 中国科技核心期刊、CSCD统计源期刊

Ethics Statement

  • Share:

Explosion and Shock Waves follows the recognized publication ethics and firmly opposes plagiarism in any form. Authors contributing to the journal must affirm that the manuscript contents are original, and the article has not been published elsewhere in any language fully or partly.

Authors, reviewers and editors of the Explosion and Shock Waves should fulfill the following responsibilities, while complying with other relevant regulations and requirements listed in the submission guideline, .

Responsibilities for Authors

1. The submitted manuscript should conform to the scopes and submission requirement of Explosion and Shock Waves. The authors should permit the peer review procedure on their manuscripts and offer the initial data if necessary.

2. The manuscript and its corresponding attachments should not involve state secret, and a non-confidential certification materials with the seal of author's institute should be provided.

3. The manuscript should be an honest description of the achievement acquired originally and independently, and should not involve any behavior of plagiarism, fraud or multiple contributions with one manuscript.

4. There is no dispute over the attribution of the research results and the authorship of the article.All signed authors should contribute substantially to the research. All the original copyright owners agree to sign the Copyright Transfer Agreement.

5. Authors should identify all sources of data used in the research, and cite publications that have had an impact in their research work.

6. All manuscripts should follow the format of the Template of Explosion and Shock Waves. In the editorial process, the authors are obliged to assist the editor to standardize and modify the manuscript.

7. Authors should notify the journal editor or publisher in time if a significant error in their publications is identified, and cooperate with the editors to publish errata, or to retract the paper, where it is deemed appropriate.

Responsibilities for Reviewers

1. Reviewers should not be involved in the benifit interest or conflict with the research, the authors or the research funcer. Otherwise, the reviewer should notify the Editorial Department in a timely manner and terminate the peer-review process.

2. Reviewers should giving objective, fair, detailed, clear, specific and well-founded comments to assist Editorial Department to make final decision for accepting or rejecting the manuscript and to assist the authors to improve the research and its pulishing. The comments should depend only on the academic criteria, and not be affected by any other issues, such as gender, race, religion, nationality, affiliation or benefit interests, etc.

3. Reviewers should alert the editor to any potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional or other relationships that might lead to bias or a conflict of interest).

4. Reviewers should alert the editor to the manuscripts that are substantially similar to published papers or submitted manuscripts.

5. When the reviewer feels that it is not possible to complete the manuscript review within the specified time, the editor must be informed in time, so that the manuscript could be sent to other reviewers.

6. Reviewers should respect the authors’ work and their ownership. Plagiarism or disclosure of authors’ work prior to publication is strictly prohibited.

Responsibilities for Editor

1. Editors are responsible for organising the peer riview during which the reviewers with relevant interests should be avoided, and the designated reviewers should also be avoided according to the author's reasonable request.

2. The acceptance, rejection and revision of the manuscript must be based on the opinions of the three reviewers and peer reviewers. It must ensured that the editors have no conflict of interest with the manuscript.

3. Editors should inform authors of the process and decision of their manuscripts, convey truthfully review opinions, answer the objection raised by authors in a timely manner, and communicate effectively with authors until an agreement is reached.

4. All manuscripts and all authors should be treated equally. Acceptance and rejection should be based on academic criteria only, without the affection by any other issues such as gender, race, religion, nationality, affiliation or benefit interests, etc.

5. Editors should supervise the manuscripts and the whole editorial process to prevent any academic misconduct behaviors.

6. Editors should respect and protect the privacy of authors and reviewers.

Retractions and Corrections

1. Editors should consider retracting the published article if clear evidence informs that the findings are unreliable as a result of misconduct or an error, if ownership of the achievements is disputed, or if any academic misconduct behaviors such as plagiarism, multiple contributions with one manuscript, duplicate publishing or fraud, etc. is involved.

2. Editors should consider issuing a correction if a small portion (especially an honest error) of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error).

  • Share: