See also: MSP General Principles and Publication Ethics

RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORS

1. Authors may submit only their own original research, which has not been previously published in any other journal. Authors may not submit work that is currently under consideration for publication in any other journal (including other MSP journals).

Prior to publication, authors are required to attest that they own the intellectual property represented in the article. (View our consent-to-publish form here.)

If an article includes experimental data, it is expected that the data are real and represent the authors' own work unless they state otherwise.

2. Plagiarism is strictly forbidden. We adhere to the COPE guidelines for dealing with suspected plagiarism. We follow this flowchart to the extent possible. (See also Responsibilities of the Journal and its Editors below.)

3. All named authors must have significantly contributed to the work. Conversely, all researchers who have significantly contributed to the work should be named as authors.

4. Submitted work must include a bibliography listing relevant references.

5. Authors should acknowledge financial support where appropriate.

6. In the event that an error in the research is discovered, authors are obligated to provide the necessary retractions or corrections, which MSP will publish in a timely manner.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF REVIEWERS

1. Judgements should be objective and well considered. Reviewers should have no conflict of interest with any participant.

2. Reviewers must retain confidentiality with respect to the reviewed article. Reviewers' identities are not disclosed to authors or third parties.

3. Reviewers should be alert for additional resources or information that could be brought to the author's attention for improvement of the article.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE JOURNAL AND ITS EDITORS

The governance structure of MEMOCS and its acceptance procedures are transparent and designed to ensure the highest quality of published material. Business concerns are not allowed to compromise intellectual and ethical standards. The Editorial Board makes the final decision on a submitted manuscript after the manuscript has been proposed for publication by an Editor (member of the Editorial Board) or Advisor (member of the Advisory Board). The proposing Editor or Advisor must explicitly endorse the paper's scientific content. The information-gathering process is open to the whole Editorial Board throughout. Specifically:

1. Upon submission, an author chooses a member of either the Editorial Board or the Advisory Board to be the article's handling editor. Members of both boards are listed on the submission webpage together with their areas of interest.

2. The handling editor enlists the cooperation of two experts to act as reviewers. If and when the handling editor decides for the publication of the manuscript, he or she sends the Editorial Board a proposal to that effect, together with the reviews and other information in support of the proposal.

3. When the handling editor chosen by the author is unable or unwilling to handle the paper, or when a conflict of interest might be present, another handling editor will take on the task.

4. The handling editor will strive to have the paper evaluated fairly. Failure to find willing reviewers after several attempts is sufficient grounds for rejection.

5. Editors must retain confidentiality with regard to reviewers' identities.

6. Within 30 days after the proposal, members of the Editorial Board express their opinion about the paper. If at least two members of the Editorial Board (apart from the proponent) second the publication proposal and no member opposes it, the article is accepted at the end of 30 days. If there are unfavorable votes at the end of the 30 days, the paper needs the support of two-thirds of the Editorial Board to be accepted.