1.0https://jossonline.comrich600338<blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="bN8vk9Y2EU"><a href="https://jossonline.com/response-to-unethical-publishing-conduct/">JoSS Response to Discovery or Allegation of Unethical Publishing Conduct</a></blockquote><iframe sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" src="https://jossonline.com/response-to-unethical-publishing-conduct/embed/#?secret=bN8vk9Y2EU" width="600" height="338" title="“JoSS Response to Discovery or Allegation of Unethical Publishing Conduct” — " data-secret="bN8vk9Y2EU" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" class="wp-embedded-content"></iframe><script> /*! This file is auto-generated */ !function(d,l){"use strict";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&"undefined"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!/[^a-zA-Z0-9]/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),c=new RegExp("^https?:$","i"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display="none";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute("style"),"height"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):"link"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute("src")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener("message",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll("iframe.wp-embedded-content"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute("data-secret"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+="#?secret="+t,e.setAttribute("data-secret",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:"ready",secret:t},"*")},!1)))}(window,document); //# sourceURL=https://jossonline.com/wp-includes/js/wp-embed.min.js </script> As an international, peer-reviewed technical journal, the Journal of Small Satellites (JoSS) is committed to maintaining the integrity of its published content. To this end, JoSS follows the policies set forth here on ethical practices, conduct, and response, consistent with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Guidelines. JoSS Authors, Reviewers, and Editors are tasked to read and understand the policies set forth below, and are expected to put them into practice in the conduct of their JoSS roles. JoSS is also committed to timely follow-up on any complaint received or issue noted, taking appropriate action on any complaints of suspected or alleged actions that are not consistent with our policies, as described herein (adapted from COPE guidance cited above). I – Primary Types of Ethical Publishing Issues Envisioned The primary types of ethical publishing issues envisioned in this Statement, and JoSS requirements and processes in place for detecting or precluding each type, include: A. Plagiarism Plagiarism is the use of another’s written words in one’s own work – either copying or paraphrasing them – as if they are one’s own (i.e., without permission, credit, or acknowledgment). JoSS Technical Area Editors (TAEs) and Reviewers are charged with the task of spotting potential plagiarism issues and calling them to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief (EiC) for investigation and resolution. They may use plagiarism detection software to screen the submissions, in addition to other means of confirming suspected plagiarism. Similarly, a complaint or report of plagiarism may reach the EiC. If plagiarism (or potential plagiarism) is identified, the JoSS response guidelines on plagiarism discussed in Section II will be followed. B. Research Results Wrongly Claimed by Authors, Research Errors, or Fraud TAEs and members of the Editorial Board, and possibly Reviewers, are all well-positioned to know what research is being carried out at any particular time, at any particular place, and by whom. Hence, there may arise questions in their exposure to submitted research results as to their authenticity, as presented. In addition, they may become aware of a challenge or complaint as to whether research results reported in a submitted article are original to the purported author(s). Similar to this authenticity challenge, there may be allegations of research errors or fraud, when reviewers or readers come to the publisher or editor with a claim such as: certain laboratories do not have the facilities to conduct the research they published; the gel images look manipulated; the data from the control experiments is too perfect, etc. In such cases, the possibility of fraud … Read more →