About the Journal
Focus and Scope
Focus and Scope of Proceeding on Science Management Art Research Technology (IC-SMART) is research, study and analysis related to:
- Management Science
- Social science
- Applied science
- Natural science
- Industrial Engineering
- Information Technology
- Technology Commercialization
- Technology Management
- Cultural Studies
Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
Open Access Policy
The Proceedings on Science Management Art Research Technology (IC-SMART) is a peer-reviewed proceedings with open access. The article processing or delivery of the manuscript submitted to the manager or editor through an online system or by using the Scholarvein System, and this Proceedings provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. This proceedings is an open-access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to full-text articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or author.
Research Synergy Ethical Guideline of Conferences and Publications
To define best practice in ethics of scientific publishing is one of the fundamental matter in research, therefore we provide instructions aiming to provide guidelines for authors; conference participants; editors; editorial board members; owners of journals; reviewers; and publishers.
How Ethical Guidelines were developed
The committees formulate the guideline by instigating series of study conducted by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), IEEE Explore Author Guideline Ethic, and I-DAS ethical through desk research method. The committees address several imperative guidelines as part of Ethical guideline that consists of General Role Ethics Guideline and Manuscript Writing Ethics Guideline. The General Role Ethics Guideline encompasses Conference Chairman Ethics, Scientific Review Ethics, Author Ethics, and Journal Editor Ethics. Meanwhile, the Manuscript Writing Ethic Guideline includes Ethics of Citation, Ethics of Data Report, Ethics in the Publishing Process, and Avoidance of Plagiarism and Redundancy of Research.
GENERAL ROLE ETHICS GUIDELINE
1. Conference Chairman/Chairwoman Duties of Conference Chairman/Chairwoman:
The Chairman/Chairwoman and the organizers of a conference are in charge of choosing which of the articles submitted to the conference to be presented in the scientific event. The approval of the work being referred to scientists and per users as well as its significance should dependably drive such decisions.
It is a characteristic outcome that the gathering Chairman is guided by the scientific judgment of the organizers and the conference scientific committee. His/her official choice is obliged by such lawful necessities at the point of be in power in regards to disparagement, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
Both Chairman/Chairwoman and session organizers must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author and reviewers.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials unveiled in a submitted original copy must not be utilized in a chair's own research paper without prior to expresses written consent to the author (s). Favoured data or opinions that went through the peer review process must be kept classified and not utilized for individual preferred standpoint.
Both Chairman/Chairwoman and scientific committee ought to recuse themselves from considering original copies in which they have irreconcilable situations imminent due to dissimilar focused, particular community, connections, or associations with any of the author, organizations, or (conceivably) foundations that are associated with the papers.
The Chairman/Chairwoman should take a sensible and responsive estimation when moral objections have been exhibited concerning a submitted original copy or distributed paper related to the distributor. Such estimates will, by and large, incorporate reaching the author of the original copy or paper and giving concerns of the particular object or cases made. Moreover, the Chairman/Chairwoman may likewise incorporate further interchanges to the significant establishments and research bodies. Each revealed demonstration of exploitative distributing conduct must be investigated, regardless the time span of postproduction of the paper.
2. Scientific Reviewer Duties of Scientific Reviewer:
Respect the confidentiality of the peer-review process and avoid utilizing data acquired amid the companion audit process for your own or another's a favorable position and to impediment or ruin others.
Any chosen person who feels inadequate to review the manuscript revealed in an original copy or realizes that its brief audit will be incomprehensible ought to advise the editorial manager and reason himself/herself from the review procedure. Review assignment can be rejected by the person themself by an announcement to the Conference Committee/ Conference Chair.
Following Standard of Review Process and Guideline
Review process ought to be led objectively. Personal criticism of the author (related to personality, gender, race, religion, and others) is improper. The scientific review team should express their perspectives plainly with supporting logic and scientific argument following the official review guideline of conference committees.
Disclosure and Avoid Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's own research without prior express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers
Unpublished materials unveiled in a submitted original manuscript must not be utilized in a reviewer's own research papers prior to expresses written consent to the author(s). Special data or opinions went through audit must be kept private and not utilized for individual preferred standpoint. Reviewer ought to exclude original manuscript in which they have irreconcilable situations imminent due to dissimilar focused, particular community, connections, or associations with any of the author, organizations, or (conceivably) foundations that are associated with the papers.
3. Authors Duties of Authors:
Perform Standard Quality of Report/ Manuscript
Author (s) report of original research should introduce an exact record of the work executed as the significant contribution of science. Hidden information ought to be precisely enunciated in the paper. A paper ought to contain adequate detail and references to allow others to recreate the work. False or intentionally erroneous proclamations determine an exploitative conduct and are unsuitable with the value that we obliged. Review process and publication articles ought to likewise be accurate and objective.
Originality and Plagiarism
The author(s) ought to guarantee that they have composed completely original works. Should the author(s) utilized the work and include expressions of others, it needs to be properly referred or cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'going off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to duplicating or summarizing considerable pieces of one’s paper (without attribution), to guaranteeing results from research led by others. Plagiarism
infringement in the entirety of its structures comprises deceptive distributing conduct and is unacceptable.
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Anyone who contributed but does not fulfill all of these roles can be included in the article’s Acknowledgment section
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Fundamental Errors of Published Work
Should there any mistake or fundamental error in published work, the corresponding author should clarify and inform the Editor or Conference Chairman to retract and correct the papers.
4. Journal Editor
Based on COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), recommends that editors reviewing such manuscript should consider the following, in addition to the usual criteria that are applied during the editorial review:
Review the validity and clarity of the study; for example, sample adequacy; appropriateness of methodology and methods being opted; biases.
Minimise ethical harm by encouraging academic integrity
Should possible act harm law or regulation of research occur, the Editor need to
conduct clarification process through any consent letter from author or committee
Maintain professional relationship and transparency with all parties in order to
maintain objectivity for the continuity of the ethical journal process
MANUSCRIPT WRITING ETHICS GUIDELINES
Writing/ reporting data accurately
The manuscript should contain valid data and no biases.
The author should avoid this violation in the manuscript writing process:
Data Fabrication : Inventing data or result
Data Falsification : Manipulating research materials, equipment, processes,
changing or omitting data and/ results
Image Manipulation : Inappropriate adjustment of an image by editing using
technology or not, especially alters the scientific meaning of the image.
Publish only original research
Manuscript only allowed to be published on one publication at the time. The manuscript should contain original research that has not been published and is not currently submitted anywhere else.
Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable and is considered a serious breach of professional conduct, with potentially severe ethical and legal consequences.
Cite source/ references appropriately
• Direct quotation:
Place verbatim text from another source in quotation marks and include a citation to the original source
• Paraphrase or summarize:
Include an in-text citation when summarizing information from another source, including ideas, processes, arguments, or conclusions
• Data, research results, information, graphics, or tables:
Cite the original source when referring to, adapting, or reusing any information from another source
Committee on Publications Ethics (COPE). 2014. Guidance for Editors: Research, Audit and Service Evaluations.
Retrieved from https://publicationethics.org/files/Guidance_for_Editors_Research_Audit_and_Service_Eval uations_v2_0.pdf
Committee on Publications Ethics (COPE). COPE Best Practice Guideline for Journal Editor. Retrieved from https://publicationethics.org/files/u2/Best_Practice.pdf
IEEE Author Center. IEEE Author Ethics Guidelines.
Retrieved from http://ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/wp-content/uploads/IEEE-Author-Ethics- Guidelines.pdf
I-DAS. 2010. Conference Publishing Ethic. Retrieved from http://www.i-das.org/
Screening for Plagiarism
All work in the manuscript should be avoided of any plagiarism, falsification, fabrications, or omission of significant material.
Authors are expected to explicitly cite others' work and ideas, even if the work or ideas are not quoted verbatim or paraphrased. This standard applies whether the previous work is published, unpublished, or electronically available. Failure to properly cite the work of others may constitute plagiarism. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. Proceeding ICTASE applies a minimum standard of similarity score of the manuscript under 20%. If the manuscript performs above 20%, the article should be revised or rejected. Proceeding IC-SMART applies a screening for plagiarism using Turnitin.