Ethical principles

EDITORIAL POLICY
For all persons involved in the act of publishing (the author, the journal editor(s), the paper reviewer and the
publisher) it is necessary to agree upon standards of editorial policy.

ORIGINALITY AND AUTHORSHIP
CEER publishes only papers that are original and have not been submitted elsewhere. Also, we require that any
and all contributions of institutions and/or individuals to the submitted work be clearly stated in the paper.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design,
execution, or interpretation of the reported study. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely
original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately
cited or quoted.

EDITOR RESPONSIBILITY
The editor of CEER is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal could be reviewed and
published in the journal. In making these decisions, the editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s
editorial board as well as by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The
editor may confer with other editors or reviewers when making publication decisions. The editor should
maintain the integrity of the academic record, preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and
ethical standards, and always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when
needed.
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Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research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.
Editors should guard the integrity of the published record by issuing corrections and retractions when needed
and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct. Editors should pursue reviewer and
editorial misconduct. An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been
presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.

ETHIC OF REVIEWS
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or
discussed with others except if authorized by the editor.
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Referees should
express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
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. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the
manuscript under consideration and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for
personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider evaluating 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 submission.