Publishing Information
Our policies and guidelines for authors, reviewers, and readers
Editorial Policies
1. Overview
CULTECH follows the guidelines of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics). Please note that journal editorial policies may differ across subject areas. Submission of a manuscript to the CULTECH Journal means that all authors have read and agreed to the manuscript and that the manuscript complies with the journal's policies. Please refer to the CULTECH Journal website for details.
2. Ethics and Consent
2.1 Ethics Approval
Research involving human participants, human materials, or human data must be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and must receive approval from an appropriate ethics committee. A statement detailing this approval, including the name of the ethics committee and the reference number (where applicable), must be included in all manuscripts reporting such research. If a study has been exempted from requiring ethics approval, this exemption must also be detailed in the manuscript, including the name of the ethics committee that granted the exemption. Further documentation supporting this exemption should be made available to the Editor upon request. Manuscripts may be rejected if the Editor determines that the research was not conducted within an appropriate ethical framework. In rare cases, the Editor may contact the ethics committee for further clarification.
2.2 Consent for Publication
For all studies involving human subjects, informed consent must be obtained from participants or, in the case of children under the age of 16, from their parents or legal guardians. A statement regarding consent to participate should be included in the manuscript within the Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate section. If informed consent is not required, the manuscript must include the name of the ethics committee granting the exemption and a justification for the exemption. Any ethical violations identified at any stage of the publication process will be rigorously investigated according to COPE guidelines and the manuscript may be rejected.
2.3 Sex and Gender in Research (SAGER)
CULTECH encourage our authors to follow the ‘Sex and Gender Equity in Research – SAGER – guidelines’ and to include sex and gender considerations where relevant.
2.4 Others
For cases not covered by specific instructions, please refer to the relevant publication guidelines or contact the journal editor directly.
3. Vailability of Data and Materials
When submitting a manuscript to CULTECH, authors must ensure that all data and materials supporting the findings of the manuscript are available. CULTECH strongly encourages authors to make all data and materials on which the conclusions rely, including relevant raw data, accessible to readers. These resources should be freely available to any researcher for non-commercial purposes, provided the confidentiality of the participants is maintained.
If the study includes datasets, authors should include an Availability of Data and Materials section in the manuscript to specify this.
• For publicly available data, authors should provide the repository name, a permanent link, and any relevant access number or DOI (e.g., “The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available at the [repository name] repository, accessible via [DOI/URL].”).
• If the data cannot be made public due to privacy, ethical considerations, or other restrictions, this must be explicitly stated (e.g., “Due to [specific reasons], the data supporting the findings of this study cannot be publicly shared but are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.”).
• For proprietary data or materials, authors must clearly outline the conditions under which they can be accessed.
CULTECH emphasizes the importance of data transparency to foster reproducibility and uphold the integrity of scientific research. Failure to provide an adequate Availability of Data and Materials statement may impact the manuscript’s eligibility for publication.
4. Standards of Reporting
CULTECH advocates complete and transparent reporting of biomedical and biological research. CULTECH strongly encourage the use of the following checklists and reporting guidelines:
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
• Randomized controlled trials (CONSORT)
• Protocols for randomized controlled protocols (SPIRIT)
• Systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) and protocols (PRISMA-P)
• Observational studies (STROBE)
• Case reports (CARE)
• Qualitative research (COREQ)
• Diagnostic/prognostic studies (STARD and TRIPOD)
• Economic evaluations (CHEERS)
• Pre-clinical animal studies (ARRIVE)
• Statistical Analyses and Methods in the Published Literature (SAMPL)
For other related guidelines, please contact the editorial office for confirmation.
5. Conflicts of Interest
5.1 Definition of Conflicts of Interest
A conflict of interest (COI) arises when personal, financial, or professional interests or relationships could affect, or be perceived to affect, the objectivity and integrity of the research, the peer review process, or the publication of manuscripts.
Conflicts of interest may be classified as:
• Financial: Direct or indirect financial interests, including but not limited to employment, funding, patents, and stock ownership.
• Non-financial: Personal relationships, academic commitments, or other interests that might influence the work or the judgment of the individual involved.
5.2 Author Declaration
Each author is responsible for disclosing to the Publisher all potential conflicts of interest regarding this manuscript (including sources of support, monetary or other, monetary interests in the products studied, consultantships, stocks, etc.) and whether the author regards them to be actual conflicts of interest.
The Editor reserves the right to request additional information regarding competing interests if necessary.
5.3 Transparency and Public Disclosure
Every submitted manuscript must include a "Competing Interests" section at the end. If no competing interests exist, the statement should read: “The author(s) declare(s) that they have no competing interests.”
Failure to disclose relevant conflicts of interest or deliberate misrepresentation of interests may result in the rejection of the manuscript, retraction of published work, or other actions as deemed necessary by the journal's editorial board.
5.4 Editor and Reviewer Declaration
Editors and reviewers are also required to disclose any competing interests and will be excluded from the peer review process if a conflict of interest is identified.
6. Authorship
6.1 Who Can be an Author
CULTECH follows the authorship criteria defined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).
Substantial Contributions: Authors should have made significant contributions to the conception, design, data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of the study.
Drafting the Manuscript: Authors should have participated in drafting the manuscript or revising it critically for important intellectual content.
Final Approval: Authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.
Accountability: Authors should ensure that any issues related to the accuracy or integrity of the work are addressed and that they are willing to take responsibility for the work published.
6.2 Order of Authors
First Author: The first author is typically the person who made the most significant intellectual contribution, usually by leading the research, performing most of the experiments, or writing the manuscript.
Middle Authors: The middle authors are listed in order of their contribution. In some cases, the order of middle authors may be determined by the amount of work they contributed to the research and manuscript writing.
Corresponding Author: The corresponding author is usually responsible for submitting the manuscript, handling the peer review process, and communicating with the journal. This author is also listed as the main point of contact for questions related to the research.
Several authors are considered to have made equal contributions. This should be clearly stated in the manuscript.
6.3 Authorship vs. Acknowledgment
There is a distinct difference between authorship and acknowledgment:
Authorship: Reserved for individuals who have made substantial intellectual contributions to the work, as per the ICMJE criteria. Authors are responsible for the content and integrity of the research.
Acknowledgment: Individuals who contributed to the research in a less significant way, such as providing technical assistance, funding, or general supervision, should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgments" section of the paper.
6.4 Changes to Authorship
Adding/Removing Authors: Any changes in the authorship list (such as adding or removing authors) must be agreed upon by all authors. It is essential to discuss and resolve authorship issues early in the research process to prevent disputes.
Corresponding Author: The corresponding author should keep all co-authors informed about the progress of the submission and ensure all authors approve the final manuscript.
6.5 Third Party Submissions
All manuscripts must be submitted by an author and may not be submitted by a third party.
7. Artificial Intelligence (AI)
The use of content generated by artificial intelligence as an original intellectual contribution is strictly prohibited.
It is strictly prohibited for AI to participate in the review process of editors and reviewers.
8. Citations
8.1 Purpose of Citations
Acknowledgment: To give credit to the original authors or creators of ideas, theories, data, or methodologies that influenced the work.
Transparency: To allow readers to verify the sources of information and evaluate their credibility.
Academic Integrity: To avoid plagiarism by properly attributing ideas and content to their rightful authors.
Scholarly Context: To position the work within the existing body of knowledge and highlight its contributions.
8.2 Appropriate Use of Citations
Citing original work, Cite primary sources whenever possible to ensure accuracy.
Include citations that are directly relevant to the research and support the claims made in the manuscript.
Excessive citations to unrelated or marginally relevant works should be avoided.
Self-citation should be limited to works genuinely related to the manuscript. Excessive self-citation may be viewed as unethical.
Authors should not cite sources that they have not read.
Authors should not use an excessive number of citations to support one point.
Authors should avoid citing work solely from one country.
8.3 Citation Integrity
Accuracy: All citations should be accurate and correspond to the correct source, including author names, titles, publication years, and page numbers.
Accessibility: Cited works should be accessible to readers, either through public archives, libraries, or online resources.
Up-to-Date References: Where possible, include recent and relevant references to reflect the current state of the field.
9. Misconduct
9.1 Data Fabrication
The act of inventing or falsifying data and results. This includes creating false data or experimental results that were never actually obtained.
9.2 Data Falsification
Manipulating research data, images, or results, such that they do not accurately represent the true data. This can involve altering data points, graphs, or images to mislead the audience.
9.3 Plagiarism
The uncredited use of someone else's work, ideas, or data. This includes copying text, images, or data without proper citation or acknowledgment, and presenting it as one's own.
9.4 Duplicate Publication (Self-Plagiarism)
Publishing the same or substantially similar content in more than one journal. Any manuscript submitted to a Cultech journal must be original and the manuscript, or substantial parts of it, must not be under consideration by any other journal.
9.5 Authorship Misconduct
Listing individuals as authors who have not made substantial contributions to the research.
Failing to acknowledge individuals who have made substantial contributions to the research.
9.6 Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest
Failing to disclose financial, personal, or professional interests that may influence the research or its interpretation. Authors must declare all potential conflicts of interest during submission, including funding sources, consultancy roles, or any other relevant ties.
9.7 Citation Manipulation
Intentional manipulation of the citation process to increase citation counts, such as excessive self-citation or arranging mutual citation agreements with other authors. This also includes the inclusion of false or irrelevant references to inflate the manuscript’s academic credibility.
9.8 Peer Review Manipulation
Interfering with the peer review process to influence the outcome.
All CULETCH journals will follow COPE guidelines for handling potential cases of publication misconduct on plagiarism.
10. Corrections and Retractions
CULTECH is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scientific record. If errors or issues are identified in published articles, appropriate actions will be taken in accordance with the guidelines set forth by the COPE and ICMJE and.
10.1 Corrections
If minor errors are found that do not affect the conclusions or integrity of the article, such as typographical errors, author affiliations, or other factual errors that require revision, will, at the Editor(s)’ discretion, be corrected via publication of a Correction that is indexed and bidirectionally linked to the original article.
10.2 Retractions
If significant errors, ethical breaches, or issues that invalidate a study's findings are identified, the journal may retract the article. In such cases, CULTECH will adhere to the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Retraction notices will be indexed and bidirectionally linked to the original article. The original article will be watermarked as retracted, and its title will be amended with the prefix “Retracted Article”.
10.3 Expressions of Concern
In cases where the validity of the article is under investigation but conclusions cannot yet be drawn, the journal may issue an expression of concern to alert readers to potential issues.
10.4 Removal of Published Content
In rare cases, published content may be removed from the online platform to comply with legal requirements, such as court orders, or to prevent serious harm (e.g., when the content is defamatory, violates privacy rights, or poses a significant public health risk). CULTECH follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when addressing such cases.
A statement will be published in its place explaining the reason for the removal, ensuring transparency.
Metadata, including the title and authorship details, will be retained unless prohibited by law.
The removal statement will be indexed and accessible where the original article appeared.
Content removal is considered an exceptional measure and is only undertaken when no other options, such as issuing a correction or retraction, are sufficient to address the issue.
10.5 Comments and Replies
CULTECH encourages scholarly dialogue and welcomes comments on published articles that provide constructive feedback, identify errors, or offer alternative interpretations of the findings. Comments must be relevant, concise, and supported by evidence.
Submission of Comments: Authors, readers, or researchers may submit comments to the journal within a specified period after the original article's publication. The comments will be reviewed for clarity, relevance, and adherence to the journal's guidelines before publication.
Author Replies: Authors of the original article will be invited to respond to published comments. Replies should address the points raised constructively and succinctly.
Editorial Oversight: Both comments and replies are subject to editorial review and may undergo peer review if deemed necessary. Comments and replies will be published alongside the original article or in a designated section of the journal.
11. Appeals and Complaints
CULTECH is committed to ensuring a fair, transparent, and unbiased editorial process. Authors and readers may raise appeals or complaints if they believe an editorial decision or process has been unfairly handled. Appeals and complaints about our processes or about publication ethics will in the first instance be handled by the Editor responsible for the journal. If the Editor is the subject of the complaint, please approach the editorial and publishing management team by email to editorial.editor@cultechpub.com
11.1 Appeals
Authors who disagree with a decision (e.g., rejection or retraction of a manuscript) may submit a formal appeal.
Appeals must be submitted to the editorial office, providing a detailed explanation and evidence supporting the request for reconsideration.
The appeal will be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and/or independent reviewers who were not involved in the original decision.
The decision on the appeal is final and will be communicated to the author.
11.2 Complaints
Complaints regarding the editorial process, peer review, ethical concerns, or publication policies can be submitted to the journal.
Complaints should include specific details and supporting evidence to allow thorough investigation.
The editorial team will acknowledge receipt of the complaint and investigate it in accordance with COPE guidelines.
If the complaint cannot be resolved by the journal, it may be escalated to the publisher or referred to COPE.
Publishing Ethics
1. Publication Ethics Statement
All CULTECH journals follow the best practices such as those outlined by these organizations:
· Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
· International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
· Council of Scientific Editors (CSE)
· National Information Standards Organization (NISO)
· National Institutes of Health (NIH)
· World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)
· World Medical Association (WMA)
2. Ethical Guidelines for Authors
CULTECH is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics. Authors are expected to adhere to the following ethical guidelines when submitting their manuscripts:
2.1 Originality and Plagiarism
Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original and has not been published elsewhere.
Proper citation and acknowledgment must be provided for any material derived from other sources.
Plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, is strictly prohibited.
2.2 Authorship Criteria
All authors must have significantly contributed to the research and fulfill the authorship criteria recommended by the ICMJE.
Individuals who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section.
The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors approve the final version of the manuscript before submission.
2.3 Data Accuracy and Integrity
Authors must ensure the accuracy of the data presented in the manuscript.
Fabrication, falsification, or selective reporting of data is considered unethical and is strictly prohibited.
2.4 Conflict of Interest
Authors must disclose any financial or non-financial conflicts of interest that could influence the interpretation of their work.
A Conflict of Interest Statement must be included in the manuscript.
2.5 Ethical Approval
For studies involving human or animal subjects, authors must provide evidence of ethical approval from an appropriate ethics committee.
Informed consent must be obtained from participants, and a statement confirming this should be included in the manuscript.
2.6 Acknowledgment of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of all sources of funding, data, and intellectual input is required.
Authors must credit any collaborators or contributors appropriately.
2.7 Multiple or Concurrent Submissions
Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable.
2.8 Corrections and Retractions
Authors must notify the journal promptly if significant errors or inaccuracies are discovered in their work, either before or after publication.
3. Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers
CULTECH upholds the highest standards of ethical conduct in the peer-review process. Reviewers play a critical role in maintaining the integrity and quality of scholarly publications. Reviewers are expected to adhere to the following ethical guidelines:
3.1 Confidentiality
Reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents.
Manuscripts and their content must not be shared, discussed, or disclosed to anyone outside the peer-review process without explicit permission from the journal.
3.2 Objectivity and Fairness
Reviews must be conducted objectively, providing constructive criticism without personal bias or hostility.
Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts solely based on their academic and scientific merit, regardless of the authors’ nationality, gender, affiliation, or other personal characteristics.
3.3 Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that could affect their objectivity, including financial, professional, or personal relationships with the authors or related organizations.
If a conflict exists, reviewers should decline to review the manuscript.
3.4 Timeliness
Reviewers should complete their reviews within the agreed-upon timeframe.
If unable to meet the deadline, reviewers should notify the journal promptly and, if possible, suggest alternative reviewers.
3.5 Competence
Reviewers should accept assignments only for manuscripts that fall within their area of expertise.
If a manuscript is outside the reviewer’s expertise, they should decline the invitation to review and, if possible, recommend another qualified reviewer.
3.6 Ethical Concerns
Reviewers must notify the journal if they suspect any ethical issues, such as plagiarism, data falsification, or duplicate publication.
If reviewers identify similarities between the manuscript under review and another published work, they should report this to the journal.
3.7 Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers should ensure that the authors have appropriately cited all relevant work.
If important published studies are missing from the references, reviewers should highlight these omissions.
3.8 Avoidance of Misuse
Reviewers must not use information or ideas obtained through the review process for their own research or personal advantage.
4. Ethical Guidelines for Editors
CULTECH is committed to ensuring ethical practices in academic publishing. Editors play a critical role in maintaining the integrity, quality, and trustworthiness of the publication process. Editors are expected to adhere to the following ethical guidelines:
4.1 Editorial Independence and Fairness
Editorial decisions should be based solely on the academic merit, originality, and relevance of the manuscript to the journal’s scope.
Editors must ensure that the peer-review process is fair, unbiased, and free from personal, financial, or political influences.
4.2 Confidentiality
Editors must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential and must not disclose any information about the manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and editorial staff involved in the process.
4.3 Conflict of Interest
Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where they have a conflict of interest due to financial, personal, or professional relationships with the authors or affiliated organizations.
Any conflicts of interest should be disclosed to the publisher, and alternative arrangements for handling the manuscript should be made.
4.4 Ethical Oversight
Editors are responsible for ensuring that all published content adheres to ethical standards, including guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
They should take appropriate action in cases of suspected ethical misconduct, such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or unethical research practices, in consultation with COPE or other relevant bodies.
4.5 Timeliness
Editors should strive to ensure a prompt review and decision-making process to avoid unnecessary delays for authors.
They must communicate decisions and feedback clearly and promptly to authors.
4.6 Peer Review Process
Editors must ensure that the peer-review process is transparent and conducted by qualified experts.
Reviewers should be selected based on their expertise and ability to provide an objective evaluation of the manuscript.
Editors should not influence the outcome of the peer review and must remain impartial throughout the process.
4.7 Transparency and Accountability
Editors should ensure that corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern are issued promptly when needed and are clearly linked to the original publication.
All editorial policies and procedures should be publicly available to maintain transparency.
4.8 Respect for Authors and Reviewers
Editors must treat authors and reviewers with respect and professionalism.
They should ensure that reviewers provide constructive feedback and that authors have an opportunity to respond to reviewers’ comments.
5. Ethical Guidelines for Publisher
As a publisher, CULTECH upholds the following ethical responsibilities to ensure the trustworthiness of the scientific record:
5.1 Commitment to Ethical Standards
The publisher ensures that all journal practices comply with the ethical guidelines of recognized organizations such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Policies related to publication ethics, conflicts of interest, and research integrity are clearly defined and publicly accessible.
5.2 Editorial Independence
The publisher supports editorial independence and ensures that editors can make decisions without undue influence from external parties, including the publisher itself.
No commercial, political, or personal interests should compromise editorial decisions.
5.3 Prevention of Misconduct
The publisher works with editors and reviewers to identify and prevent ethical misconduct, including plagiarism, data fabrication, and falsification.
Allegations of unethical behavior are thoroughly investigated and addressed following COPE guidelines.
5.4 Support for the Editorial Process
The publisher provides adequate resources and training to editors, reviewers, and authors to promote best practices in publishing ethics.
It ensures that the peer-review process is rigorous, fair, and timely.
5.5 Transparency and Accountability
The publisher ensures transparency in the publication process by publishing clear policies on authorship, data sharing, and conflicts of interest.
Retractions, corrections, or expressions of concern are issued promptly and prominently when errors or ethical issues are identified.
5.6 Data Protection and Privacy
The publisher ensures compliance with applicable data protection laws, safeguarding the confidentiality of authors, reviewers, and other stakeholders involved in the publishing process.
5.7 Conflict Resolution
The publisher is responsible for addressing disputes or ethical concerns that arise during or after publication.
Complaints from authors, reviewers, or readers are investigated thoroughly and resolved in a fair and impartial manner.
5.8 Intellectual Property Rights
The publisher respects and protects intellectual property rights, ensuring that all published content complies with copyright laws and proper attribution is provided to original sources.
Peer Review Policy
1. Publishing Standards and Guidelines
CULTECH follows the following guidelines and standards for its journals:
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
Council of Scientific Editors (CSE)
National Information Standards Organization (NISO)
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)
World Medical Association (WMA)
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
Randomized controlled trials (CONSORT)
Protocols for randomized controlled protocols (SPIRIT)
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) and protocols (PRISMA-P)
Observational studies (STROBE)
Case reports (CARE)
Qualitative research (COREQ)
Diagnostic/prognostic studies (STARD and TRIPOD)
Economic evaluations (CHEERS)
Pre-clinical animal studies (ARRIVE)
Statistical Analyses and Methods in the Published Literature (SAMPL)
2. Type of Peer Review
CULTECH operates double anonymized peer review, in which the referees remain anonymous to the author(s) throughout and following the refereeing process, whilst the identity of the author(s) is likewise unknown to the reviewers.
3. Reviewer Selection
Reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the subject matter of the manuscript.
The editorial team ensures that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the authors or the research.
4. Review Process
4.1 Submission and Initial Assessment
Upon submission, manuscripts are checked by the editorial office for adherence to the journal’s scope, formatting guidelines, and basic quality standards.
Manuscripts that fail to meet these criteria may be returned to the authors without further review.
4.2 Editorial Screening
The manuscript is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or Editorial Board Member to determine its suitability for peer review.The editor evaluates the originality, relevance, and scientific merit of the work. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable are rejected at this stage.
4.3 Peer Review Assignment
Suitable manuscripts are assigned to two or more expert reviewers who possess the relevant knowledge and expertise in the subject area.
Reviewers are asked to assess the manuscript’s originality, scientific validity, methodology, significance, and clarity. They also provide recommendations on acceptance, revision, or rejection.
4.4 Editorial Decision
The editor evaluates the reviewers’ comments and recommendations to make one of the following decisions:
Accept: The manuscript is accepted without revisions.
Minor Revision: Authors are asked to address minor issues before acceptance.
Major Revision: Substantial revisions are required; the revised manuscript may undergo re-review.
Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards or scope.
A detailed decision letter is sent to the authors, including the reviewers’ feedback.
4.5 Revisions
Authors are given a specified timeframe to submit a revised manuscript addressing the reviewers’ and editor’s comments.
The revised manuscript is reviewed by the editor and, if necessary, sent back to the original or new reviewers for further evaluation.
4.6 Final Decision
After all revisions have been satisfactorily addressed, the editor makes a final decision on the manuscript’s acceptance.
Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting and production.
4.7 Appeals
Authors who disagree with a rejection decision may submit an appeal.
Appeals are reviewed by a senior editor or an independent reviewer, and the final decision is communicated to the authors.
4.8 Production
Once a manuscript is accepted for publication, it enters the production phase.
5. Confidentiality
All submitted manuscripts and correspondence are treated as confidential.
Reviewers are prohibited from sharing or discussing manuscripts with anyone outside the review process.
6. Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and decline the review if a conflict exists.
Editors will ensure that the peer-review process remains unbiased and impartial.
7. Appeals and Re-reviews
Authors may appeal editorial decisions by providing a detailed justification. Appeals will be reviewed by a senior editor or additional reviewers.
Revised manuscripts may be subjected to re-review by the original or new reviewers.
8. Ethical Standards
CULTECH adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines for ethical peer-review practices.
Any ethical concerns raised during peer review, such as plagiarism or data manipulation, will be investigated thoroughly.
9. Transparency and Accountability
The journal maintains detailed records of the peer-review process for all manuscripts.
Editors and reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive and respectful feedback to authors.
By adhering to this peer-review policy, CULTECH ensures the publication of high-quality and ethically sound research that advances scientific knowledge.
Open Access Policy
1. Definition of Open Access
Open Access (OA) refers to the practice of providing free and unrestricted access to research outputs, such as journal articles, conference papers, datasets, and other scholarly works, without requiring a subscription or payment. OA allows readers to access, read, download, and reuse the content without financial or legal barriers, increasing the visibility and impact of research.
2. OA Publishing Models
CULTECH supports Gold Open Access. In this model, all content in the journal is freely available to the public upon publication.
3. Article Processing Charges (APCs)
For Gold Open Access publications, authors may be required to pay an Article Processing Charge (APC). The APC covers the costs associated with the production, peer review, and open-access publication of the article. APCs vary depending on the journal and the article type, and authors will be informed of the charges during the submission process.
We offer discounts or waivers of the APC for authors from low-income countries or in cases of financial hardship. Authors should inquire about such options at the time of submission.
4. Copyright & License
4.1 Copyright
Authors publishing in all CULTECH journal will transfer the copyright of their work to the CULTECH PRESS journal.It is a condition of publication that manuscripts submitted to this journal have not been published and will not be simultaneously submitted or published elsewhere. Plagiarism is strictly forbidden, and by submitting the article for publication the authors agree that the publishers have the legal right to take appropriate action against the authors, if plagiarism or fabricated information is discovered. By submitting a manuscript, the authors agree that the copyright of their article is transferred to the publishers if and when the article is accepted for publication. Once submitted to the journal, the author will not withdraw their manuscript at any stage prior to publication.
4.2 License
Authors grant CULTECH a license (CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0) to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher.
5. Impact and Visibility
Open Access increases the visibility and accessibility of research, often leading to higher citation rates and broader dissemination across disciplines. By making research freely available, CULTECH PRESS aims to accelerate scientific discovery and innovation, contributing to a more open and collaborative research environment.
6. OA Compliance and DOI
All articles published under Gold Open Access are assigned a Digital Object Identifier (DOI), ensuring that the work is permanently accessible and properly cited. The DOI provides a permanent link to the article, facilitating easy access and citation by researchers globally.
7. OA Publishing Ethics
CULTECH adheres to ethical publishing practices and ensures that all Open Access content complies with international standards, including those set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). We are committed to maintaining high-quality peer review, data transparency, and research integrity in all our OA publications.