• ISSN: 2582-7944

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

eLifePress is a monthly, open-access, peer-reviewed international journal that calls for uniqueness, unpublished research papers on various topics of science, engineering, management, technology, mathematics and many other knowledge streams. eLifePress is known for publishing unique and original research articles which genuinely take into account the copyright guidelines and protect our authors’ rights. After an in-depth review the research papers are written by academics, scholars who wish to protect the rights to use. Our oversight members of the Review and Editorial board evaluate all submitted research papers using a double-blind associate assessment process to prevent plagiarism. eLifePress sets the quality criteria for publishing the most effective and acceptable research papers. It requires writers to review their compositions for a written falsification examination, and to decide that they will only submit extraordinary material for publication.

Responsibility of Authors

Expected Quality

  • Writers are specifically instructed to avoid the methods of copying and pasting documents.
  • Papers should retain their longevity and excellence in attracting their target intellectuals for further studies.
  • Reports must show creativity in their thought and content. Content integrity and reliability determine the right ethics for the publication.
  • Formatting criteria should be preserved in a publication such that the work and profile of the authors will be properly informative.
  • Appropriate citations, referencing of individual articles. Authors and publications are necessary during the writing of documents;
  • eLifePress provides ample basis for the timely publishing of high-quality and standard research papers
  • For publications, eLifePress follows a transparent and peer-review process. Authors must consent to be involved in the peer review process

Novelty and Plagiarism

  • Authors are expected to present the entirely original piece and should cite or mention in references if content or words of other articles are used.
  • Each author shall be held accountable for the results and comply with the policy to prevent malpractice and infringe the ethical principles of publishing.
  • Authors should ensure that the publishable piece of information is an original copy that has not been published anywhere earlier and is not accepted for publication somewhere else.
  • Authors will recognize and correct the mistakes, and consider the recommendations made by the panel of reviewers.

Exposure Benchmarks

  • Authors are expected to present accurately their research articles compatible with the original work standards which illuminate the importance of writing the paper.
  • The topic underlying the data will relate precisely to the title of the paper showing its value.
  • The research papers will contain detailed citations and references to the material used in article of others.  
  • Misleading, unethical practice or a knowing breach of quality standards is strictly prohibited.

Data Access and Retention

  • Authors are expected to submit the original research articles for peer review, and accept the global access of their work.
  • Authors should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

  • Ethically it is suggestible to authors to not publish the same content of knowledge at various platforms for publication
  • Simultaneous submissions or concurrent reviews of the same paper are marks of unprofessionalism and are strictly not acceptable.
  • A paper already published in some national or international journal should not be presented for consideration to again publish at any other Journal. It is considered a breach of novelty.

Acknowledgement of Sources

  • During the course of study whatever sources are accessed and used must be mentioned in the article for publication.
  • Authors must cite and mention in references if the content of some other research work influences the reported work.
  • Information received during training tenure or confidential services or by third party discussion then it is advisable to use data of somebody else’s research only after getting a written permission from the source.

Authority of Paper

  • The names of authors and co-authors should be mentioned significantly in the research paper.
  • Contributors, agencies and institutions that support the study or have taken part in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be listed in the acknowledgments or as contributors.
  • Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed substantially to the concept , design, execution or analysis of the published research.
  • The corresponding author has seen and accepted the final version of the paper by all the co-authors, and has decided to submit it for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

  • Where the work includes chemicals, procedures or equipment with any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author shall clearly describe these in the manuscript.
  • Where the work involves the use of animals or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures have been carried out in accordance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines, and that they have been approved by the appropriate institutional committee(s).
  • Researchers will make a declaration in the paper that they have received informed consent for experiments with human subjects.
  • The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

  • All authors should report any financial or other substantive conflict of interest in their manuscripts which may be construed to affect the outcome or analysis of their manuscripts.
  • All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
  • Examples of potential conflicts of interest to be disclosed include jobs, consultancies, stock ownership, commissions, compensated expert testimony, applications / registrations for patents and grants or other funding. Possible conflicts of interest should be identified at the earliest possible point.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

  • When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
  • If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Duties of Editors

Publication Decisions

  • The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions.
  • The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
  • The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

Fair Play 

  • Manuscripts should be reviewed by an editor for their intellectual content without regard to the authors’ race , gender , sexual preference, religious opinion, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy.


  • 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.

Divulgation and conflicts of interest

  • Confidential information contained in the manuscript submitted shall not be used in the publisher’s own research without the express written permission of the author.
  • Proprietary information or suggestions gained by peer review shall be held confidential and shall not be used for personal gain. Editors should reuse (i.e. ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board to review and consider) the consideration of manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or (possibly) institutions linked to the manuscripts.

Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations

An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant even if it is discovered years after publication.

Duties of Reviewers

(These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.)

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions, and can also assist the author in developing the paper by editorial contact with the author. Peer review is a key component of formal scholarly communication, and is at the heart of the scientific method.


Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.


Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

 Reviews should be carried out critically.  Author’s   personal criticism is inappropriate. Referees should clearly express their views with arguments that support it.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewer will classify related published research which the authors have not cited. Any statement previously reported of an observation, derivation, or argument should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Any significant resemblance or similarity between the manuscript under scrutiny and any other published paper about which they have personal knowledge should also be brought to the attention of a reviewer.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider 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 papers.



Managing Editor, eLifePress