Ethical Guidelines

1. Publication Ethics Statement

Global Academy of Sciences Florida (GASF) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and research integrity in all aspects of scholarly publishing. The publisher follows the core principles and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), ensuring that all editorial and publishing activities are conducted in accordance with internationally recognized ethical standards. GASF supports academic freedom and editorial independence, and is dedicated to maintaining transparency, fairness, and accountability throughout the publication process. Editorial decisions are based solely on the scientific merit, originality, and relevance of submitted manuscripts, without influence from commercial or external interests.

All GASF journals apply COPE-recommended procedures when addressing potential ethical issues, including but not limited to concerns related to authorship, data integrity, plagiarism, conflicts of interest, and peer review integrity. Editorial teams are trained to identify, evaluate, and appropriately manage such issues in a consistent and responsible manner.

Through the implementation of robust ethical policies and procedures, GASF Publisher ensures the integrity of the scholarly record and fosters trust in academic communication across all disciplines.

2. Ethical Guidelines for Authors

2.1 Author Responsibilities

Authors

Authors are expected to ensure the originality, authenticity, accuracy, and reproducibility of their research. Where appropriate, data sources should be clearly identified to enable verification and support further scholarly investigation.

GASF does not permit duplicate submission or duplicate publication. Manuscripts must not be under consideration elsewhere or previously published in any form.

Research involving humans, animals, or plants must comply with applicable ethical standards and must have received approval from relevant institutional review boards or ethics committees. Informed consent must be obtained where personal or clinical data are involved. Clinical trials should be properly registered, and permission must be obtained for the use of any copyrighted material. Supporting documentation may be requested by the Journal Office.

Authors are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest in accordance with journal policy. Further details are provided in the Conflict of Interest section.

All authors must have made substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. GASF strongly encourages authors to provide their ORCID iD to support transparent author identification.

If significant errors or inaccuracies are identified after publication, authors are required to promptly notify the Journal Office and cooperate fully in issuing a correction or retraction when necessary.

Ethical conduct in publishing is strictly enforced. Cases of plagiarism, inappropriate authorship, or other forms of publication misconduct are not tolerated. Confirmed violations may result in manuscript rejection, retraction of published articles, notification to relevant institutions, and restrictions on future submissions.

Authors may contact the Journal Office regarding the status of their manuscript or submit concerns or complaints related to the editorial process to the Editor-in-Chief.

Corresponding Authors

The corresponding author is responsible for acting as the primary contact with the journal throughout the submission, peer review, publication, and post-publication stages. They must ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the submitted manuscript, including its content, author list, affiliations, and author order, and that all authors are informed of all substantive editorial communications, including reviewer reports and editorial decisions. In general, only one corresponding author should be designated for each manuscript.

The corresponding author is also responsible for ensuring that the manuscript complies with journal standards for transparency, reproducibility, and research integrity. This includes the appropriate preservation of research data, figures, materials, and code to allow verification or reanalysis when required, as well as the accurate presentation of research findings. Where applicable, they are expected to facilitate the sharing of data, materials, or code in accordance with journal policies.

In relation to authorship, the corresponding author must ensure that all listed authors meet the journal’s authorship criteria and that any changes to the author list, including additions, removals, or reordering, are agreed upon by all authors. Clear justification must be provided for any modifications. Authorship disputes are handled in accordance with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Further details are provided in the Authorship and Contribution section.

The corresponding author must also confirm that the manuscript complies with all relevant ethical and publication requirements. This includes ensuring that appropriate ethical approvals have been obtained, conflicts of interest have been properly disclosed, clinical trials are registered where applicable, and permissions for the use of third-party material have been secured.

Following acceptance, the corresponding author is responsible for reviewing page proofs for accuracy and completeness. After publication, they remain the primary contact for communication with the journal and are responsible for informing all co-authors of any post-publication issues, including errors that may require correction or retraction.

2.2 Authorship and Contribution

Authorship

Authorship is based on internationally recognized standards, including those defined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Individuals listed as authors must have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; contributed to drafting or critically revising the manuscript; approved the final version for publication; and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Contributions such as funding acquisition, data collection, or general supervision alone do not qualify for authorship. Artificial intelligence or AI-assisted technologies must not be listed as authors under any circumstances.

Authorship should be agreed upon collectively by all co-authors prior to submission, including the order of authorship, which must accurately reflect individual contributions. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors have approved the manuscript and the author list before submission. GASF requires verification of all listed co-authors, and each co-author will be notified to confirm their authorship.

All manuscripts must be submitted by one of the authors. Submission by third parties is not permitted. All authors share responsibility for the integrity, accuracy, and ethical compliance of the published work.

Contribution

GASF Publisher requires all submitted manuscripts to include a clear statement of individual author contributions. This statement should appear at the end of the manuscript and specify the role of each author in the research and manuscript preparation process, such as conceptualization, methodology, data curation, analysis, investigation, visualization, and writing of the original draft or revision.

Where authors have contributed equally to a study, this may be indicated as co-first authorship. Equal contribution should be clearly marked on the title page using a symbol (e.g., “#”), accompanied by a statement such as: “These authors contributed equally to this work.” In general, no more than two co-first authors are permitted.

Author contribution statements are intended to promote transparency in research authorship and ensure appropriate credit is assigned for all contributions to the work.

Authorship Changes

GASF journals follow COPE guidelines for all authorship changes to ensure transparency and integrity.

Authors should carefully determine the list and order of authors before submission and provide the final author list at the time of original submission. Any changes to the author list—including additions, removals, or reordering—should generally be made before acceptance and require approval from the journal editor. The corresponding author must provide:

(i) The reason for the change; and

(ii) Written confirmation from all authors, including any being added or removed, that they freely consent to the change.

Requests are subject to Editorial Office approval, and verification from an institutional official may be required.

Post-acceptance changes are allowed only in exceptional circumstances. Manuscript processing may be suspended while the editor considers the request. For manuscripts already published online, approved authorship changes may result in a corrigendum.

2.3 Research Misconduct

GASF journals have a zero-tolerance policy for all forms of misconduct. Allegations should be reported to the Editorial Office and are investigated following COPE guidelines. Based on findings, the journal may issue an erratum or retract the article and may contact authors’ institutions, funding agencies, or affected parties.

Plagiarism

All manuscripts are screened using iThenticate. Authors must properly cite all sources and avoid extensive reuse of text, tables, figures, or content from previous works, including their own. Manuscripts with substantial uncredited matches will be rejected.

Duplicate Publishing

Duplicate publication occurs when a manuscript substantially overlaps with previously published work without proper reference or disclosure. This applies to publications in any language, journal, or publicly accessible source. Authors must disclose any related prior publication at submission. Failure to do so may result in rejection, retraction, or other actions in accordance with publication ethics policies.

Internet postings or conference proceedings may count as prior publication. Submissions previously posted on not-for-profit preprint servers (e.g., arXiv, AgriRxiv, bioRxiv) are acceptable.

Falsification or Fabrication of Data

Fabricating data, reporting experiments that were not conducted, or manipulating data to achieve desired outcomes is strictly prohibited. This includes inappropriate image manipulation, such as adding, removing, or enhancing features, grouping images improperly, or altering contrast, brightness, or color to misrepresent results.

Improper Author Contribution or Attribution

All listed authors must have made substantial scientific contributions and approved the manuscript’s content. Everyone who contributed significantly—including students or laboratory staff—must be acknowledged. (Read more in Section 2.2: Authorship and Contribution.)

Citation

Accurate and appropriate citation is an essential component of scholarly publishing. Authors are responsible for ensuring that all references included in their manuscripts are accurate, authentic, and complete. Citations must correctly reflect the original sources and be fully traceable. Practices such as misquotation, selective citation, misattribution, fabrication of references, or citation manipulation are considered forms of academic misconduct. Authors are required to verify all bibliographic information, including author names, article titles, journal names, publication year, volume, issue, page range, and DOI. The use of artificial intelligence to generate or fabricate references is strictly prohibited.

References should be relevant, appropriate, and primarily derived from peer-reviewed scholarly sources. Authors are expected to cite original research where applicable, acknowledge prior work fairly (including their own), and avoid excessive self-citation, biased citation practices, or citation padding. Retracted publications must be clearly identified and should only be cited when scientifically justified.

Duplicate or redundant citations should be avoided unless there is a clear scholarly reason. Where multiple entries refer to the same work, they should be consolidated into a single reference.

All references must comply with the journal’s formatting requirements and include complete bibliographic details. Inaccurate, incomplete, or inconsistent references may result in delays during peer review or require correction prior to publication or post-publication.

GASF Publisher reserves the right to review citation practices during the editorial process. Inappropriate or unethical citation behavior may result in requests for revision, rejection of the manuscript, or removal of problematic references. Where necessary, suspected cases of citation-related misconduct will be handled in accordance with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and may involve communication with authors’ institutions or relevant ethics committees.

2.4 Research Ethics and Consent

GASF Publisher is committed to ensuring that all published research involving humans, animals, plants, or sensitive biological materials is conducted in accordance with internationally recognized ethical standards and applicable regulatory requirements.

Human Research Ethics

All studies involving human participants must comply with the ethical principles outlined in the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. Research must receive prior approval from a recognized ethics committee or institutional review board, and the name of the approving body together with the approval reference number must be clearly stated in the Methods section of the manuscript.

Informed consent must be obtained from all participants prior to inclusion in the study, and additional consent is required for the publication of any identifiable information. Authors are responsible for ensuring that any restrictions on data use are clearly declared.

The privacy and confidentiality of human subjects must be strictly protected. Identifiable information, including names, initials, dates of birth, contact details, medical record numbers, hospital identifiers, or geographic information, must not be published without explicit written consent. Authors are expected to anonymize or remove identifying details wherever possible.

Cell Line Research

The origin and provenance of all cell lines must be clearly stated. For de novo human-derived cell lines, ethical approval and documented informed consent from donors are required. Authors are responsible for ensuring that all biological materials have been obtained and used in accordance with ethical and legal requirements.

Animal Research

Research involving animals must be conducted in accordance with applicable institutional, national, and international guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals. Ethical approval from an appropriate committee must be obtained prior to the commencement of the study, and details of the approving authority and approval number must be included in the manuscript.

Authors are strongly encouraged to follow the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research. Manuscripts should include sufficient methodological detail, including species, sex, age, body weight, housing and husbandry conditions, and procedures used to minimize pain, suffering, and distress.

Plant Research

Studies involving plants, particularly genetically modified organisms, must comply with applicable institutional, national, and international regulations. Authors must confirm that all necessary permits and approvals have been obtained and must include a statement of compliance within the manuscript.

Where relevant, authors are strongly encouraged to adhere to the principles of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

Dual Use Research of Concern

Research that may have potential implications for public health, safety, or national security must clearly disclose such risks. Authors are required to provide a balanced assessment of potential benefits and risks and to confirm compliance with all applicable laws and regulatory frameworks.

Sex and Gender Considerations

Authors are encouraged to follow the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines. Where appropriate, studies should distinguish between sex and gender, report disaggregated data, and provide justification when sex- or gender-based analyses are not included.

Clinical Trials Registration

In accordance with the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), all clinical trials must be prospectively registered in a publicly accessible and recognized clinical trial registry prior to participant enrollment. The trial registration number and registry name must be clearly stated in the Methods section of the manuscript.

Ethical approval from a local or institutional review board does not replace the requirement for prospective registration. In cases where a study protocol has been published prior to trial initiation, registration requirements may be considered fulfilled in accordance with applicable guidelines.

CONSORT Reporting Requirements

For randomized controlled trials, authors are required to comply with the CONSORT Statement (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials). A completed CONSORT 2010 checklist and flow diagram must be submitted with the manuscript to ensure transparent and complete reporting of study design, conduct, analysis, and interpretation.

Image Integrity and Processing Standards

GASF enforces strict standards for the integrity of all scientific images. Images must faithfully represent the original data and must not be manipulated in a manner that could mislead interpretation or alter scientific meaning.

Only minimal, uniform adjustments to the entire image—such as brightness, contrast, or color balance—are permitted, provided they do not obscure, eliminate, or enhance specific features of the data. Any form of manipulation that introduces, removes, relocates, or selectively enhances elements of an image is strictly prohibited.

Where images are derived from different experiments, time points, or locations, this must be clearly indicated in the figure legend or Methods section. Authors are also required to provide detailed descriptions of image acquisition, instrumentation, software used, and any processing steps applied.

2.5 Corrections, Retractions, and Withdrawals

GASF journals follow COPE guidelines for post-publication issues. Ethical concerns—including scientific misconduct, undisclosed conflicts of interest, errors, or technical issues—should be reported to the journal’s Editorial Office.

Corrections

Authors must promptly notify the journal of significant errors in their published work. The Editorial Office will work with authors and the publisher to correct important errors. Corrections (Erratum for publisher errors, Corrigendum for author errors) are linked to the original article. The author making the request of corrections is responsible for writing the correction notice that clearly identifies the error, what the correct information is, and which version of the original article has been corrected.

Retractions

As outlined in the COPE Retraction Guidelines, the journal will consider retracting an article if:

There is a major scientific error which would invalidate the conclusions of the article.

Redundant publication occurs without proper citation or permission.

Ethical issues arise, including plagiarism, inappropriate authorship, unauthorized use of data, or undisclosed conflicts of interest.

Unethical research has been reported.

Legal or copyright issues are present.

Peer review process was compromised or manipulated.

In accordance with COPE guidelines, GASF adopts the following retraction process: Potential Retractions are thoroughly investigated by the Editorial Office with the support of the Editorial Board and final approval by the Editor-in-Chief. The original article is marked as retracted, but a PDF version remains available to readers which will be watermarked as "RETRACTED ARTICLE". The retraction statement explaining the reason is bi-directionally linked to the original published paper.

Withdrawals

Authors may withdraw manuscripts before or after acceptance for compelling and unavoidable reasons, with due regard for the time and effort of editors, reviewers, and the journal.

In the event that the Editorial Office is unable to maintain communication with the author, the journal reserves the right to withdraw the manuscript after a designated period of inactivity.

3. Conflict of Interest

GASF requires full disclosure of all potential conflicts of interest (financial or non-financial) by authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff. A conflict exists when any relationship could be perceived as influencing the objectivity, integrity, or interpretation of the work.

Authors

Manuscripts must include a “Conflict of Interest” section. Authors must disclose any financial or non-financial interests that could be perceived as influencing the results or interpretation of their manuscript. Authors must identify all organizations, institutions, or individuals who provided financial or material support for the research or the preparation of the manuscript. Authors serving as Editorial Board Members, Guest Editors, or Academic Editors must declare their editorial role in the Conflict of Interest statement. If no conflicts exist, authors must state: "The authors declare no conflict of interest." All declarations provided during peer review will be available to reviewers and will be published with the article after acceptance.

Reviewers

Reviewers must declare conflicts before reviewing, including close personal or professional relationships with authors, shared grants, recent co-authorship, or shared institutional affiliation.

Editors and Academic Editors

Editors, Guest Editors, and Editorial Board Members must disclose any conflicts of interest related to a manuscript. Editors with a conflict must recuse themselves from handling or decision-making. Conflicts may include collaboration with the authors, shared institutional affiliation, personal relationships, or financial interests. In-house editors with conflicts must step aside early, and the manuscript will be reassigned to an editor without conflicts.

Editorial Staff and Publisher

All editorial staff of GASF are required to declare any financial or non-financial interests that may influence, or be perceived to influence, editorial decisions.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are based solely on scientific quality, originality, and relevance. Financial, institutional, or personal interests must not influence judgment. Journal growth, financial considerations, or institutional interests must not influence editorial judgment, and editorial standards must not be compromised under any circumstances.

4. Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

Reviewers are responsible for providing objective, fair, and timely evaluations of submitted manuscripts. Peer review should be conducted with professionalism, confidentiality, and respect for authors’ intellectual contributions. Reviewers are expected to provide constructive feedback that supports both editorial decision-making and the improvement of manuscript quality.

Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality regarding all submitted manuscripts and related materials. Manuscripts, data, and review reports must not be shared, discussed, or used for personal advantage prior to publication. In particular, the use of generative artificial intelligence tools to process, store, or analyze manuscripts or review reports is strictly prohibited due to risks related to confidentiality, intellectual property, and data integrity.

Reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest and should decline invitations when such conflicts may affect impartiality. Any suspected cases of academic or ethical misconduct must be reported promptly to the Editorial Office or Editor-in-Chief.

Peer review reports should be evidence-based, constructive, and clearly structured to support editorial assessment. Reviewers are expected to comment on the originality, scientific validity, methodological rigor, data interpretation, and relevance of the manuscript. Ethical considerations and potential limitations should also be identified where applicable. Reviewers should avoid requesting unnecessary citation of their own work unless it is scientifically justified.

To ensure efficient editorial processing, reviewers are expected to complete initial reviews within 7–10 days and revised manuscript evaluations within 3 days, with extensions available upon request. 

Editors may review and edit reports to ensure professionalism and remove inappropriate content prior to transmission to authors.

5. Ethical Guidelines for Editors

Editors of GASF journals are expected to uphold the highest standards of integrity, fairness, and professionalism in all aspects of manuscript handling. Editorial responsibilities must be carried out in a manner that ensures the credibility of the scholarly record and the trust of authors, reviewers, and readers.

All submitted manuscripts are evaluated solely on their academic merit, originality, and relevance to the journal’s scope. Editors must assess submissions fairly and impartially, without discrimination based on race, religion, nationality, gender, seniority, institutional affiliation, or any other non-scientific factors. Editorial decisions are independent and must not be influenced by the publisher, sponsors, or external interests.

Confidentiality is a fundamental obligation of the editorial process. Editors must treat all manuscripts and associated materials as privileged information and must not disclose, discuss, or use unpublished data for personal research or advantage without explicit consent from the authors. This obligation extends to peer review reports and reviewer identities where applicable. To safeguard confidentiality, editors must not upload or share unpublished manuscripts, reviewer comments, or editorial communications on public or non-secure platforms, including generative AI tools or external systems that may compromise data security.

Editors are responsible for ensuring that all submissions undergo an independent and rigorous peer review process. Reviewer selection should be based on expertise, objectivity, and the absence of conflicts of interest. Editorial staff must not interfere with reviewer judgments or influence acceptance decisions. Final editorial decisions must be grounded exclusively in the scientific quality and integrity of the manuscript.

To maintain transparency and avoid conflicts of interest, editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a personal, professional, or financial connection. This includes submissions authored by the editors themselves, their colleagues, collaborators, or individuals with whom a close relationship exists. Such manuscripts must be reassigned to an independent editor who can oversee the review process objectively.

Editors also have a duty to respond appropriately to ethical concerns. Any credible allegations of misconduct—whether involving authorship, data integrity, plagiarism, reviewer behavior, or editorial conduct—must be investigated in coordination with the publisher and handled in accordance with established ethical standards and best practices. Where necessary, editors must take appropriate corrective actions to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record, including issuing corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern.

Timeliness and professionalism are essential components of editorial responsibility. Editors should strive to ensure that manuscripts are processed efficiently and that communication with authors and reviewers is clear, respectful, and prompt throughout the editorial process.

Through adherence to these principles, GASF Publisher ensures that its editorial practices remain transparent, ethical, and aligned with international standards, thereby supporting the dissemination of reliable and high-quality scholarly research.

6. Appeals and Complaints

GASF is committed to maintaining a fair, transparent, and efficient editorial process. Authors who believe that an editorial decision has been made in error, or who have concerns regarding the handling of their manuscript or broader publication ethics issues, may submit an appeal or complaint.

Appeals against editorial decisions should be supported by clear evidence, such as potential misunderstandings of the scientific content, errors in the review process, or other substantive concerns. Appeals based solely on disagreement with reviewer opinions, or on the perceived novelty or scope of the work, are unlikely to be considered.

All appeals are evaluated independently by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated senior editor who was not involved in the original decision. Additional expert opinions may be sought where necessary. Decisions made following appeal are final.

In addition to appeals, the Publisher also considers complaints related to editorial procedures, including delays in peer review, communication issues, or concerns regarding reviewer conduct. Complaints may also involve publication ethics matters such as conflicts of interest, plagiarism, or other forms of misconduct. All cases are handled confidentially and in accordance with established ethical standards and COPE guidelines.

Authors wishing to submit an appeal or complaint should provide a formal written statement to the Editorial Office, clearly outlining the grounds and including all relevant supporting information. The Editor-in-Chief or handling Editor will initially assess the case. If a complaint involves these individuals, it will be handled directly by the Publishing Office to ensure independence.

Depending on the nature of the case, the journal may conduct further review, request additional expert evaluation, or provide feedback to improve editorial procedures.