Code of Ethics
The Journal has formulated a Statement of Ethics for authors, editors, and reviewers based on the guidelines and standards published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and in accordance with its own practice.
For Authors
1. Responsibility and Authenticity: Authors must ensure the authenticity of their manuscripts, refrain from plagiarism, and actively participate in the research work. Any upublished content or text must be clearly cited with proper attribution.
2. Authorship Criteria: Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the research. All authors must unanimously agree on the submission and publication of the manuscript. Any changes to the order of authorship, or the addition or removal of authors before publication, must be approved by all authors and submitted to the editorial office with a written justification. The journal generally does not accept changes to the first or corresponding author after submission, nor does it accept the
designation of co-first or co-corresponding authors.
3. Confidentiality and Sensitivity: Authors must ensure that their manuscripts do not involve sensitive issues related to political, military, or state secrets that are unsuitable for publication.
4. Originality and Exclusivity: Manuscripts submitted to FCE should be original and not under consideration by another journal. Authors should avoid submitting the same or highly similar manuscripts to more than one journal simultaneously to prevent duplicate or repetitive publication.
For Editors
1. Fair and Impartial Handling: Editors must handle all manuscripts fairly, impartially, and promptly, making decisions based on the opinions of the Editorial Board and relevant regulations.
2. Confidentiality: Editors must maintain the confidentiality of author and reviewer information and keep the contents of the manuscript confidential until it is published.
3. Independent Peer Review: Editors must ensure the independence of peer review by selecting unbiased reviewers and not interfering with the review process based on personal interests. This ensures that peer review remains fair and impartial.
4. Verification of Reviewer Information: When authors recommend reviewers, editors must verify the authenticity of the reviewers' information. The decision to use recommended reviewers should be based on their expertise and potential conflicts of interest. Reasonable requests from authors to exclude certain reviewers must be honored.
5. Prevention of Academic Misconduct: Editors are responsible for preventing academic misconduct such as multiple submissions, duplicate publications, and plagiarism.
They should conduct thorough checks at various stages, including initial submission, acceptance, and pre-publication.
For Reviewers
1. Single-Blind Peer Review: FCE employs a single-blind peer review process. Reviewers must have the necessary expertise to evaluate the manuscript and provide objective, timely feedback to assist both the editorial board and the authors in improving their work.
2. Conflict of Interest: Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts if they have any conflicts of interest with the author, such as personal, financial, intellectual, or professional conflicts, or if they are from the same institution or team.
3. Confidentiality of Review Process: Reviewers should not share data, arguments, or interpretations from the manuscript without the authors' permission and should not delegate the review to others without prior approval from the editorial board.
4. Ethical Conduct: Reviewers must uphold the ethical standards of the journal, ensuring that their reviewsare conducted with integrity and without bias.
Ethical Oversight
The journal follows strict ethical standards in all aspects of publication. Research involving human participants or animals must have received approval from an appropriate institutional ethics committee, and authors must provide documentation upon request. All submitted manuscripts are screened for plagiarism and research misconduct.
Handling of Academic Misconduct
The Journal always adheres to strict academic ethical standards and resolutely eliminates academic misconduct (e.g., duplication of papers, plagiarism, fabrication and falsification of experiments, data or content, etc.). If a paper involves any misbehavior, the editorial board will fully assist the relevant departments in the investigation. For academic misconduct with solid evidence, punitive measures will be taken such as blacklisting all authors, notifying the author's organization, withdrawing the paper, and pursuing the legal responsibility of the authors.
Complaints and Appeals
1. Complaints may relate to the editorial process (e.g., perceived bias, long delays, or improper behavior), publication ethics (e.g., plagiarism, data manipulation), or other concerns
related to the journal’s content or practices.
2. All complaints should be submitted in writing to the journal's editorial office via fce@cspub-hk.org. Each complaint will be acknowledged promptly and investigated
thoroughly, with respect for all parties involved. Outcomes will be communicated as soon as a conclusion is reached.
3. Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision should clearly state the grounds for appeal and provide any supporting evidence. Appeals must be submitted within 30 days of
receiving the decision.
Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections
Discussions: Readers are welcome to submit comments or concerns regarding published articles. Valid issues may be addressed through letters, author responses, or editorial notes.
Corrections: If errors are found that do not affect the overall conclusions, a correction will be published and linked to the original article.
Retractions: In cases of serious issues such as misconduct or unreliable findings, the journal may issue a retraction or an expression of concern.