• Ensure you read and understand the various aspects of our publishing ethics policy and guidelines carefully in terms of authorship, research integrity and follow all aspects of our research conducts.
• Ensure you follow the highest standards of research rigour and integrity.
• Make sure your read and understand the above various research and publishing ethics polices and guidelines provided by our various publishing partners particularly the CODE OF CONDUCT AND BEST PRACTICE GUIDELINES of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
• Submitted papers should not have been previously published nor be currently under consideration for publication elsewhere. (N. B. Conference papers may only be submitted if the paper was not originally copyrighted and if it has been completely re-written).
• All papers submitted for publication in WASD journals are refereed through a double blind process.
• All submitted articles/chapters should not include libellous, defamatory or unlawful statements.
• Obtain all necessary approval/permission for any third-party material included in your submission.
• Proof of consent has been obtained for any named individuals or organisations.
• All submissions must be original, fully referenced and that all authors are represented accurately. Ensure authorship has been agreed prior to submission and no one has been ‘gifted’ authorship or denied credit as an author (ghost authorship).

Editors:

• Uphold the highest standards of rigour and integrity in all aspects of research and ensure and protect the reputation of WASD books and journals by only publishing high quality content.
• Read fully, understand and follow COPE core practices and guidelines during all editorial processes. In doing so, WASD editors will carry out thorough, objective and confidential peer review for original contents submitted after the initial desk quality and editorial check. Also, they have to clearly justify with details any content which will not be peer reviewed such as editorials, opinion viewpoints, etc.
• Ensure that intellectual property is respected, research integrity maintained and where required use Crossref Similarity Check to check for potential misconduct and/or plagiarism by any author, following COPE guidelines, when dealing with papers where any significant levels of similarity to other works are detected.
• Avoid any bias in editorial decision-making and provide a transparent review and publication process as far as is possible and they should judge each article on its merits, without regard to race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author(s).
• Full respect and care paid to the author(s) and not to use any data or analysis presented in a submitted manuscript in the editor’s own research without the consent of the author and allow authors the right to appeal any editorial decision. Editors must also be familiar with WASD editorial appeals process for appeals against editorial decisions.
• Keep their peer-review process confidential and must not share information about a manuscript with anyone outside of the peer-review process.
• Ensure, as far as possible, that papers meet ethical standards on authorship; originality and all issues relating to misconduct and/or plagiarism.
• Delegate the peer review of any original article to a member of the editorial or advisory board as appropriate.

Reviewers:

• Similar to the editors, all WASD reviewers must uphold the highest standards of rigour and integrity in all aspects of research and ensure and protect the reputation of WASD books and journals by only publishing high quality content.
• Read fully, understand and follow COPE core practices and guidelines during all editorial processes. In doing so, WASD reviewers will carry out thorough, objective and confidential peer review for original contents submitted after the initial desk quality and editorial check.
• Only accept invitations to review work that is relevant to their own expertise and speciality and seek advice from the editor if anything is unclear at the time of invitation.
• Declare any conflict of interest before agreeing to review a manuscript. This includes any relationship with the author that may bias their review.
• Avoid any bias in reviewing decision-making and provide a transparent review and publication process as far as is possible and they should judge each article on its merits, without regard to race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author(s).
• Review submitted work in a responsible, impartial and timely manner.
• Report any suspected ethical misconduct as part of a thorough and honest review of the work.
• Remain in good communication with both the publisher and the editor.