Chinese Journal of Wood Science and Technology follows the recognized publication ethical practices. Plagiarism in any form is not acceptable. Authors submitting articles to the journal must affirm that manuscript contents are original. They must also warrant that their article has neither been published elsewhere in any language fully or partly, nor is it under review for publication anywhere.

The editors, authors, and reviewers of Chinese Journal of Wood Science and Technology would perform the following duties, and adhere to the submission guidelines and other requirements of the journal.

 

 Duties of Editor

1. Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript.

2. Editors should have no conflict of interest with respect to articles they reject/accept.

3. Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality, by using the appropriate software. After passing this test, the manuscript is forwarded to two reviewers for double-blind peer review, each of whom will make a recommendation to accept, reject, or modify the manuscript.

4. The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by “Chinese Journal of Wood Science and Technology” is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors.

 

Duties of Authors

1. Authors must present an accurate account of their original research as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Manuscripts will follow the submission guidelines of the journal.

2. Author must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. The author should not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same research in more than one journal.

3. Authors must acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in their research work.

4. Authorship must be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution must be listed as co-authors.

5. The funding or financial support information related to the research in the manuscript must be clearly stated, and other funding information which isn't related to the research should not be written.

6. All authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes, in case of detection.

7. List of references should be provided by authors.

 

Duties of Reviewers

1. Manuscript reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. If the reviewers find plagiarism or a manuscript cast more phenomenon, they should immediately report to the editor.

2. Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers will express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

3. Reviewers should have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors, and/or the research funding agencies.

4. Reviewers will point out relevant published work which is not yet cited.

5. When a reviewer considers that it is  impossible to complete reviewing of the manuscript within the stipulated time,  he/she must communicate with the editor. So that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.

 

Retractions and Corrections

1. Editors will issue retractions if there are clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error); the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication); it constitutes plagiarism; it reports unethical research.

2. Notices of the retraction will be linked to the retracted article wherever possible (i.e. in all electronic versions); clearly identify the retracted article (e.g. by including the title and authors in the retraction heading); be published promptly to minimize harmful effects from misleading publications.

3. Editors will issue a correction if a small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error); the author / contributor list is incorrect (i.e. a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included).