Publication Ethics Statement

Maintaining a strong sense of ethics and adhering to ethical standards is crucial for all participants in academic research, paper writing, and the publication process. The journal Ship & Boat is committed to upholding high standards of publication ethics, providing transparent and standardized services to fulfill this commitment, and offering appropriate advice when academic misconduct is detected in authors' articles. Below, we outline several key publication ethics principles and guidelines that are vital to our journal. For more detailed information, please refer to the official website of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (http://www.publicationethics.org/) and the publication ethics standards established by organizations such as the European Association of Science Editors (EASE).

I. Authors' Publication Ethics

Authors are obligated to declare that their paper represents original research work and does not contain any fabricated, deceptive, or plagiarized content. Authors must not misuse artificial intelligence (AI) tools for writing, including but not limited to generating the main structure, core ideas, and key content of the paper.

The paper must not involve state or commercial secrets or any intellectual property infringement issues. It must undergo a confidentiality review by the author's institution and be stamped accordingly. When submitting, authors must upload the copyright agreement and confidentiality review certificate to the copyright agreement section of the journal's submission and review system. Authors must solemnly declare that the paper has not been submitted to multiple journals and that the content has not been published in any other language, in any other journal or media. Authors also guarantee that they will not submit the paper to another journal before receiving a rejection notice from the editorial board.

All cited literature must be clearly marked with the source and listed in the references. Units and individuals who provided scientific funding or consultation for the paper must be acknowledged in the acknowledgments. Authors must respect the revision opinions of reviewers and editors and agree to grant the Ship & Boat editorial board the exclusive license to use and the sole agency rights of the paper's copyright after publication. After submission, especially after acceptance or publication, if authors discover errors in the paper, they should proactively contact the editorial board to correct or take other remedial measures.

Authors must avoid the following academic misconduct:

1. Multiple Submissions: Authors must ensure the originality of their submitted paper and confirm that it has never been published before. When submitting to Ship & Boat, the paper must not be simultaneously submitted to other journals or be in any review stage of any other publication. If the paper has been published in a different form (including in different languages) or if a similar paper has been published or translated, the author must explain this during submission. Deliberately republishing an already published paper is a serious violation of publication ethics.

2. Plagiarism: Plagiarism is one of the most common and severe violations of publication ethics. Plagiarism refers to the deliberate use of others' work without the original author's consent or without proper citation or acknowledgment. Plagiarism can take the form of directly copying or rewriting others' work, including data, text, sentences, paragraphs, ideas, and concepts. Our journal strictly prohibits any form of plagiarism.

3. Co-authorship: Indicating authorship ensures that individuals who contributed to the research are recognized and held accountable for the research. Deliberately distorting the relationship between researchers and the study is unethical and undermines the credibility of the research results. Submitting authors must obtain authorization and consent from co-authors before submission. AI tools are not accepted as co-authors.

4. Originality: Authors should not submit already published data as original material unless explicitly stated and appropriately cited.

5. Research Fraud: Research fraud refers to data or conclusions that are not derived from experiments or research but are fabricated or manipulated by the author. In all cases, researchers must carefully verify all calculations and data representations and must not commit fraud. AI tools must not be used to fabricate literature, content, or data.

II. Peer Review

1. All manuscripts to be published must undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process.

2. Authors may recommend 2-3 reviewers to the editorial board and may also specify reviewers to be avoided. The final selection of reviewers is determined by the editorial board.

III. Reviewers' Publication Ethics

Reviewers must ensure the scientific accuracy of the manuscript review and provide objective and fair evaluations. They must maintain strict confidentiality of the review content and respect the authors' research outcome. Reviewers must avoid reviewing manuscripts with which they have a conflict of interest.

1. Reviewers should use their professional knowledge and expertise to evaluate the manuscript's innovation, scientific rigor, and practical applicability. They should assess whether the research methods are appropriate, the research design is reasonable, and whether the results and conclusions are accurate. They should also check for any potential confidentiality issues and provide fair evaluations to help the editor decide whether to accept or reject the manuscript. Reviewers should offer detailed revision suggestions to help authors improve the quality of their papers.

2. Reviewers should only evaluate the academic content of the manuscript and should not make personal judgments or engage in personal attacks. The decision to accept or reject a manuscript should not be influenced by the author's gender, religion, beliefs, race, status, seniority, or authority. Reviewers must clearly articulate their views with sufficient evidence and facts.

3. Reviewers should complete the review and submit their feedback to the editorial board within the stipulated time. If they cannot meet the deadline, they should inform the editorial board and return the manuscript.

4. Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality of the reviewed manuscript. They should not share, discuss, or use the data, ideas, or conclusions from the manuscript without the author's consent.

5. Reviewers should ensure that all reports and evidence cited in the early stages of the research are clearly indicated. Reviewers should confirm that the author has not omitted any relevant published works. Based on their knowledge, reviewers should inform the author of any similarities or overlaps between the submitted paper and previously published papers or data.

6. All review comments and information must be kept confidential and should not be used for personal purposes. Reviewers must not review manuscripts where there is a conflict of interest due to competition or collaboration with the author, their institution, or their company.

IV. Editors' Publication Ethics

1. Editors should handle manuscripts according to the prescribed procedures (see the journal's manuscript handling process and instructions for details).

2. After a manuscript passes the initial review, the editorial board should invite peer experts to review the manuscript using a double-blind review process. The editorial board should ensure that the manuscript is sent to appropriate reviewers and should urge reviewers to return their comments promptly.

3. The editorial board must maintain the confidentiality of reviewers' and authors' personal information and the content of the manuscript during the review process.

4. When suspected academic misconduct is detected, the editorial board should investigate and verify the issue, contact the author for an explanation, and take appropriate action. If academic misconduct is confirmed, the manuscript under review will be rejected, and for manuscripts already published online, corrections or retractions will be issued as necessary. The author will be given criticism and education, and in severe cases, the author's institution may be notified.

V. Academic Misconduct Detection

1. In addition to the initial review by the editorial board and the double-blind peer review, the journal also uses academic misconduct detection software for auxiliary screening. Academic misconduct detection is conducted twice: the first time upon receipt of the manuscript, and the second time before publication.

2. The detection software used includes Wanfang Data's "Wanfang Detection - Journal Paper Cooperation Edition" (WFSD) and CNKI's "Academic Misconduct Literature Detection System" (AMLC), which quickly detect plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, and other forms of academic misconduct. If the total text replication ratio exceeds 30%, the manuscript may be directly rejected. If the total text replication ratio is between 15% and 30%, the detection results will be communicated to the author, who will be asked to make revisions. If the total text replication ratio is below 15% and all references are correctly cited, the manuscript is considered acceptable.

3. Academic misconduct by authors includes plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, improper authorship, multiple submissions, duplicate publication, and violation of research ethics. For more details, please refer to CY/T 174-2019 Academic Publishing Standards - Definition of Academic Misconduct in Journals.

4. Authors must not misuse AI tools for writing, including but not limited to generating the main structure, core ideas, and key content of the paper.

Ship & Boat Editorial Board