This resource center provides information and services to help you publish your research and review for Journal of Refrigeration. Core practices are our journal and authors and reviewers need, to reach the highest standards in publication ethics. Here we list several vital publication ethics to our journal. For more details, please refer to the web of the Publication Ethics Committee (COPE).

 

Our processes & policies

 

Initial assessment of submissions

Please refer to the first review requirements during the review process, the link as follows:

http://www.zhilengxuebao.com/zlxben/ch/common_item.aspx?parent_id=20171201024433891&menu_id=20220322144252001

 

Appeal procedure

Authors have the right to appeal against any decision taken on their manuscript at any stage; an appeal would be granted at the discretion of the editorial broad Journal of Refrigeration. Through the appeal process further opinion will be sought on the manuscript's suitability for publication. After the appeal process the editor's decision is final.

Step 1: Send a rebuttal letter to the editor. The letter should explain clearly why you disagree with the decision on your manuscript, and should include a detailed response to reviewers’ comments.

Step 2: The editor will consider your appeal. All appeal requests are handled on a case by case basis and the editor's decision is final.

Step 3: Your manuscript will undergo further assessment by an independent reviewer.

Step 4: The editor will make a final decision on your manuscript.

 

Accepted manuscripts

All the accepted manuscripts will be available on our and CNKI website as soon as possible. The edited and formatted advance article will replace the accepted manuscript after publication.

 

Correction & retraction policy

The Committee on Publishing Ethics (COPE) guidelines is followed when correcting and retracting articles.

Correction

We will consider issuing a correction if:

   The scientific record is seriously affected, for instance with regard to the scientific accuracy of published information.

   A small part of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error).

   The author/contributor list is incorrect (i.e. a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included). We will not usually publish a correction that does not affect the contribution in a material way or if the issue does not significantly impair the reader's understanding, such as spelling or grammatical error. The correction is free to view and is linked to the article of record that it corrects.

Retraction

We will consider issuing a retraction notice if:

   We have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (for example, data preparation) or honest error (such as a miscalculation or experimental error).

   The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification (that is, cases of redundant publication)

   The publication constitutes plagiarism

   The publication reports unethical research.

The retraction notice is free to view and is linked to the article of record that it retracts; the article of record will be watermarked 'RETRACTED'.

 

Author responsibilities

This section provides guidance to authors on their responsibilities and the code of conduct they should follow when submitting to Journal of Refrigeration. It also describes what are considered to be conflicts of interest, and outlines our policy on human and animal welfare.

 

Authorship

There is no broadly agreed definition of authorship, but authors should, as a minimum, take responsibility for a particular section of the study. The award of authorship should balance intellectual contributions to the conception, design, analysis and writing of the study against the collection of data and other routine work. If no task can reasonably be attributed to a particular individual, then that individual should not be credited with authorship. Authors have a responsibility to give due acknowledgement to all workers contributing to the work. Those who have contributed significantly to the research should be listed as co-authors. On submission of the manuscript, the corresponding author should make sure that those named as co-authors have agreed to its submission for publication and accepts the responsibility for having properly included all (and only) co-authors. All authors must sign the Transfer of Copyright agreement before the article can be published. Changes in authorship after initial submission must be approved by all authors and justified to the editor.

 

Authenticity & professionalism

Collect and interpret data in an honest way: Editors, reviewers, readers and publishers have the right to assume that submitted (and published) manuscripts do not contain scientific dishonesty and/or fraud comprising among others fictitious or manipulated data, plagiarised material, reference omissions, false priority statements, 'hidden' multiple publication of the same data and wrong authorship. Authors must not breach any copyright. For the reproduction of figures and/or schemes from other publications, it is the author's responsibility to seek permission from the relevant publishers. Give due recognition to published work relating to their submitted manuscript by way of correct reference and citation: if a significant amount of other published material is to be used, permission must be sought in accordance with copyright law. Any act of plagiarism is strictly forbidden.

 

Funding information

All sources of fundings for the work should be declared in the manuscript.

 

Publication of related works

Do not engage in redundant publication: This occurs when two or more papers, without full cross reference, share the same hypothesis, data, discussion points, or conclusions. Previous publication of an abstract or preprint of the proceedings of meetings does not preclude subsequent submission for publication, but full disclosure should be made..

 

Reviewers responsibilities

Ensure scientific and accurate review of manuscripts and make objective and fair evaluation. Make use of their professional knowledge and ability to review the creativity, scientificity and practicability of manuscripts; Put forward fair evaluation on whether the research method is appropriate, whether the scientific research design is reasonable, whether the results and conclusions are accurate, and whether there is leakage, so as to help the editor judge the choice of manuscripts; Put forward detailed modification suggestions for the problems existing in the article, so as to help the author improve the quality of the paper. Respect the author's research results and avoid manuscripts with interests. The reviewed documents are only evaluated academically, without personal evaluation and personal attack. The choice of manuscripts will not be affected by the contributor's race, gender, religion, belief, status, qualification and authority. They must clearly state their views with sufficient arguments and facts. Fill in the review comments on the reviewed manuscripts on time and feed them back to the editorial department within the specified time. If it cannot be completed on time, the editorial department shall be informed in time. Strictly keep the reviewed manuscripts confidential, do not circulate or discuss them to others, and do not use and publish the data, opinions and conclusions of the reviewed manuscripts. All comments and information must be kept confidential and shall not be used for personal purposes.

 

Editorial responsibilities

Editors strictly implement relevant national laws and regulations, abide by academic publishing ethics and norms, and maintain scientific research integrity. Fair selection of manuscripts and acceptance or rejection of articles can only be based on the originality, importance and clarity of the paper and whether it conforms to the purpose and scope of the journal. Editors should register the newly received manuscripts in time and forward the manuscripts that have passed the academic misconduct test （http://echeck.cnki.net/） to two or more reviewers for three rounds of single blind peer review. Respect the author's research results and the opinions of reviewers. Keep the authenticity of the review records, and keep the information of each link of review and modification confidential. The editor and the staff of the editorial department shall not disclose any information related to the submission of the paper to others except to provide the required information for the corresponding author, reviewer and members of the Editorial Committee as appropriate. The editor shall edit and process the reviewed manuscripts, and communicate with the author on the standardization and other issues in the manuscripts when necessary. It has the obligation to investigate and communicate academic misconduct. Once there is an academic moral appeal of submitting a paper or publishing an article, the editor must take effective countermeasures. If necessary, corrections, clarifications, withdrawals or apologies shall be published in a timely manner. Editors are obliged to hold the authors and reviewers accountable for their misconduct.