Publication Ethics

Financial Internet Quarterly is committed to upholding the ethical standards of scientific publications and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. All the articles submitted for publication are peer reviewed for authenticity, ethical issues and usefulness.
Based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors

Duties of the Editorial Board:

Section editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. They evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit and take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. Editors may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
All articles submitted to Financial Internet Quarterly are subject to verification by the UITM’s antyplagiat system.

Duties of Reviewers:

Any manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review is not used for personal advantage. Reviews are conducted objectively, and observations are formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible must inform the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers are not to consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

Duties of Authors:

Authors should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.