Statement of Publication Ethics – CIT Review Journal (CRJ)
The CIT Review Journal (CRJ) is dedicated to publishing high-quality, peer-reviewed scholarly work and upholding publication and review practices that meet the highest ethical standards. CRJ follows the guidelines and best-practice principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All manuscripts submitted to CRJ undergo rigorous evaluation and are approved by the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board, which is composed of distinguished academics and experts from leading universities around the world.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The CIT Review Journal (CRJ) recognizes that publishing peer-reviewed research is a fundamental contribution to building a reliable, coherent, and respected body of knowledge. Each published article reflects the quality of the authors’ work and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed scholarship strengthens academic rigor and upholds the principles of the scientific method. For this reason, CRJ maintains clear ethical standards for all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, editors, reviewers, the publisher, and the broader scholarly community.
As the official publisher of the CIT Review Journal, the Canadian Institute of Technology (CIT) takes its responsibility for overseeing all stages of the publication process with the utmost seriousness. The journal is committed to ensuring that editorial decisions remain fully independent and are never influenced by advertising, reprints, or any commercial considerations. When necessary, the CRJ Editorial Board collaborates with other journals and publishers to support ethical communication and uphold best practices across the academic publishing landscape.
Duties of Authors
These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies.
Reporting Standards
Authors submitting original research to the CIT Review Journal (CRJ) are expected to provide a clear, accurate, and objective account of the work conducted, along with a balanced discussion of its significance. All underlying data must be presented truthfully, and manuscripts should include sufficient detail and appropriate references to allow other researchers to replicate the study.
Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide raw data for editorial review and should retain such data for a reasonable period after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors must ensure that all manuscripts submitted to the CIT Review Journal (CRJ) are entirely original works. Whenever authors draw upon the ideas, data, or wording of others, these sources must be properly cited or quoted. Plagiarism—whether through presenting another researcher’s work as one’s own, copying or closely paraphrasing substantial portions of existing publications without attribution, or claiming results derived from research conducted by others—is strictly prohibited and constitutes unethical publishing behavior.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
Authors submitting to the CIT Review Journal (CRJ) must not publish manuscripts that present essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary outlet. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals at the same time is considered unethical and is strictly prohibited. Likewise, authors should not submit a paper to CRJ that has already been published elsewhere.
In certain cases, publishing specific types of work—such as guidelines, translations, or similar materials—in more than one journal may be acceptable, but only under clearly defined conditions. Both the authors and the editors of the involved journals must agree to the secondary publication, which must accurately reflect the same data and interpretation as the original work. The initial publication must be properly cited in the secondary version.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others is essential. Authors submitting to the CIT Review Journal (CRJ) must cite all sources that have influenced the development of their research. Any information obtained privately—such as through personal conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties—may not be used or reported without obtaining explicit written permission from the source.
Authorship
Authorship for manuscripts submitted to the CIT Review Journal (CRJ) should be limited to individuals who have made a substantial contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research. All contributors who have played a meaningful role in the study must be listed as co-authors. Individuals who contributed to specific aspects of the project, but not to the extent required for authorship, should be acknowledged appropriately or listed as contributors.
Hazards and Human/Animal Subjects
If a submitted study involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that present unusual or significant hazards, authors must clearly describe these risks within the manuscript. For research involving human or animal subjects, authors must ensure that the manuscript includes a statement confirming that all procedures were carried out in accordance with applicable laws, institutional policies, and ethical guidelines, and that approval was obtained from the appropriate institutional review committee(s).
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors submitting to the CIT Review Journal (CRJ) must disclose any financial or personal conflicts of interest that could influence the results, analysis, or interpretation of their research. Every source of financial support for the study must be clearly identified within the manuscript. Potential conflicts may include employment relationships, consulting activities, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications or registrations, grants, or any other form of funding. Such disclosures must be made as early as possible in the submission process to ensure transparency and uphold the journal’s ethical standards.
Fundamental Errors
If an author becomes aware of a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must promptly inform the Editor-in-Chief or the journal’s publisher and work cooperatively to issue a correction or retraction. If the editor or publisher is notified by a third party that a published article contains a serious mistake, the author is responsible for addressing the issue without delay—either by correcting or retracting the work, or by providing evidence that the original publication is accurate.
Duties of the Editorial Board
These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Publication Decisions
The Editor-in-Chief of the CIT Review Journal (CRJ) holds the responsibility for determining which submitted manuscripts are suitable for publication. These decisions must always be guided by the validity of the research, its scholarly merit, and its relevance to the journal’s readership. Editorial judgments are informed by the policies established by the CRJ Editorial Board and must comply with applicable legal standards, including those related to libel, copyright, and plagiarism.
Fair Play
An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality
The Editor-in-Chief and all members of the editorial team at the CIT Review Journal (CRJ) must treat every submitted manuscript as strictly confidential. No information regarding a submission may be shared with anyone other than the corresponding author, assigned reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial advisors, or the publisher, when appropriate.
Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished material contained in a submitted manuscript must never be used in an editor’s own research without obtaining the author’s explicit written permission. Any privileged information or ideas gained through the peer-review process must remain confidential and must not be used for personal benefit.
Editors of the CIT Review Journal (CRJ) must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest—whether arising from competitive, collaborative, or other professional or institutional relationships with any of the authors or organizations connected to the submission. In such cases, the manuscript should be reassigned to another editor or member of the editorial board.
Editors must also ensure that all contributors disclose any relevant competing interests. If conflicts of interest are discovered after publication, the journal will issue appropriate corrections and, when necessary, take further action such as publishing a retraction or an expression of concern.
Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations
Editors of the CIT Review Journal (CRJ) must take appropriate and timely action whenever ethical concerns are raised about a submitted manuscript or a published article. Working in coordination with the publisher, the editor should contact the author, review the details of the complaint, and give full and fair consideration to the issues presented. When necessary, the editor may also communicate with relevant institutions or research bodies to support a thorough investigation.
If an ethical breach is confirmed, the journal will issue the appropriate corrective measure, which may include a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or another formal notice. Every allegation of unethical publishing behavior must be examined, regardless of when it is discovered—even if the issue arises years after publication.
Duties of Reviewers
These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review plays a central role in supporting the Editor-in-Chief of the CIT Review Journal (CRJ) in making informed editorial decisions. Through constructive communication with authors, the review process also contributes to improving the quality and clarity of submitted manuscripts. As a core element of scholarly communication, peer review is fundamental to maintaining academic rigor and upholding the principles of the scientific method.
Promptness
Any reviewer invited to evaluate a manuscript for the CIT Review Journal (CRJ) who feels unqualified to assess the research, or who knows that they cannot complete the review in a timely manner, must promptly inform the editor and withdraw from the review process.
Confidentiality
Manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews must be carried out in an objective and impartial manner. Personal remarks or criticism directed at the author are not acceptable. Reviewers should present their evaluations clearly and support their comments with appropriate reasoning.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers should point out any relevant published work that the authors have not cited. If a reviewer notes that a particular observation, derivation, or argument has appeared previously, they must provide the appropriate reference. Reviewers must also alert the editor to any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and other published work they are personally familiar with.
Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must not use any information, data, or ideas encountered during the evaluation of a manuscript for their own research unless the author has granted explicit written permission. All material obtained through peer review is considered privileged and must remain confidential, never exploited for personal or professional gain.
Reviewers are also expected to decline any assignment where a conflict of interest exists—whether due to competitive, collaborative, financial, or other professional or institutional relationships with the authors, companies, or organizations connected to the manuscript.