Editorial Policies

1. Overview

Scilight Press adheres strictly to the guidelines and core principles set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). As a publisher of academic works, Scilight Press is committed to upholding the principles of academic freedom, editorial independence, and the highest standards of research integrity.

By submitting a manuscript to a Scilight journal, the authors affirm that they have carefully reviewed and consented to the content and that the manuscript adheres to the journal’s specific policies and guidelines.

Scilight Press maintains a neutral stance concerning jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

2. Communicate with Respect

At Scilight Press, we firmly believe that trust and high-quality publishing products and services can only be achieved through relationships built on mutual respect. Our staff are expected to maintain professionalism and respect in all interactions with authors, reviewers, and readers. Similarly, we uphold the expectation that the academic community and the public will engage with our staff in the same manner.

We do not tolerate aggressive behavior, harassment, bullying, or discrimination directed toward Scilight Press staff. In cases of serious violations, we reserve the right to report the matter to employers or local authorities as appropriate and may refuse to engage with individuals who repeatedly or egregiously breach this policy.

3. Authorship and Contribution

3.1. Authorship

Everyone listed as an author should meet our criteria for authorship. Everyone who meets our criteria for authorship must be listed as an author, and the contributions of all authors must be reported. All authors are expected to have made substantial contributions to the submitted work and be accountable for the work before and after publication. According to the ICMJE guidelines, to qualify as an author, one should have (i) made substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; and (ii) been involved in drafting the manuscript or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) given final approval of the version to be published. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content; and (iv) agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Acquisition of funding, data collection, or general supervision of the research group alone does not usually justify authorship.

We expect that all authors will take public responsibility for the content of the manuscript submitted to Scilight Press. All manuscripts must be submitted by an author and not by a third party.

The corresponding author takes the primary responsibility for communication with the journal and Editorial Office during the submission process, throughout peer review, and during publication. The corresponding author is also responsible for ensuring that the submission adheres to all journal requirements, including but not exclusive to, details of authorship, study ethics and ethics approval, clinical trial registration documents, and conflict of interest declaration. The corresponding author should also be available post-publication to respond to any queries or critiques. Although the corresponding author has primary responsibility for correspondence with the journal, all authors will be contacted by email to ensure that they are aware of and approve the submission of the manuscript, its content, and its authorship.

3.2. Authorship Changes

Scilight Press journals follow the COPE guidelines for changes in authorship.

Changing the author list after submission requires agreement from all authors. This includes additions, deletions, and changes in ordering. Requests must come from the corresponding author, along with an explanation of how any added authors contributed to the work and why the author(s) are being added/removed after the initial submission. The corresponding author must also provide Scilight Press documentation verifying that all authors, including any being added, deleted, or reordered, have given written consent to the change(s). Authorship change requests are subject to Scilight Press' approval; we may require validation of authorship contributions from an institutional official.

Scilight Press does not generally consider requests to add or remove authors between acceptance and publication of the article. If there are special circumstances that apply to your article such that a post-accept authorship change is needed, please contact the journal office. These requests require approval by the journal's editorial team.

In the case of an authorship dispute, the journal will not arbitrate. If the authors are unable to resolve the dispute themselves, we will defer the issue to the authors' institution(s) in accordance with COPE guidelines. The journal will abide by institutional recommendations following authorship investigations, with rare exceptions.

Authorship changes after publication are addressed via Corrections, except in rare circumstances.

3.3. Contribution

Each author is expected to have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; or the creation of new software used in the work; or have drafted the work or substantively revised it; AND has approved the submitted version (and version substantially edited by journal staff that involves the author’s contribution to the study); AND agrees to be personally accountable for the author’s contributions and for ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated, resolved, and documented in the literature.

For research articles with several authors, a short paragraph specifying their individual contributions must be provided. For example, Author 1 Full Name: conceptualization, methodology, software; Author 2 Full Name: data curation, writing—original draft preparation; Author 3 Full Name: visualization, investigation; Author 4 Full Name: supervision; Author 5 Full Name: software, validation; Author 6 Full Name: writing—reviewing and editing.

4. Conflict of Interests

Any interest or relationship, financial or otherwise that might be perceived as influencing an author's objectivity is considered a potential source of conflict of interest. These must be disclosed when directly relevant or directly related to the work that the authors describe in their manuscript. The existence of a conflict of interest does not preclude publication. If the authors have no conflict of interest to declare, they must also state this at submission. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to review this policy with all authors and collectively to disclose all pertinent commercial and other relationships during submission.

Declare conflicts of interest or state ”The authors declare no conflict of interest.” If there is no role, please state, “The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results”.

5. Peer Review

In most Scilight Press journals, we operate a single-blind peer-review process, where reviewers remain anonymous to the authors. However, some journals follow a double-blind peer-review system, in which both the authors’ and reviewers’ identities remain concealed until the paper is published. All research articles, reviews, and other article types, published in Scilight Press journals undergo peer review. This usually involves review by at least two independent, expert peer reviewers, to ensure high-quality, impactful publications that are both academically rigorous and policy-relevant. All manuscripts will be checked for plagiarism using the iThenticate to detect instances of overlapping and similar text.

All submissions to Scilight Press journals undergo a technical check for completeness before being assessed by an Academic Editor (usually the Editor-in-Chief or a member of the Editorial Board authorized by the Editor-in-Chief). The Academic Editor determines whether the manuscript is suitable for peer review.

The Academic Editor considers the peer review reports when making both the initial and final decisions but is not bound by the reviewers' opinions or recommendations. A significant concern raised by a single peer reviewer or the Academic Editor may lead to the manuscript's rejection. Authors receive peer review reports along with the editorial decision on their manuscript.

Further peer review guidelines in Scilight Press are at Peer Review Policy.

6. Research Misconduct, Post-Publication

6.1. Research Misconduct

Scilight Press takes issues of copyright infringement, plagiarism, or other breaches of best practice Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing very seriously. We seek to protect our authors' rights and always investigate claims of plagiarism or misuse of published articles. Equally, we seek to protect the reputation of the journal against malpractice.

If a manuscript is confirmed to have committed publication misconduct, we will immediately apply the abovementioned penalties.

Plagiarism

In addition to the direct copying of text, with or without paraphrasing, from a single source without proper acknowledgement, the common types of plagiarism are: Mosaic plagiarism (patchwork plagiarism) and Self-plagiarism/text-recycling.

• Mosaic plagiarism (patchwork plagiarism)
  This is when text is lifted from a few different sources (which may include your own previous work) and put into your manuscript to create the impression of new text.
• Self-plagiarism/text-recycling
  This is the redundant reuse of your own work (e.g., text, data, and images), including text translated from another language, usually without proper citation. It creates repetition in the academic literature and can skew meta-analyses if you publish the same sets of data multiple times as "new" data.

Of course, other types of plagiarism also exist. What they all have in common is a lack of transparency to the original source of the material used in the manuscript.

Duplicate Publishing

Duplicate publication is the publication of a paper that overlaps substantially with one already published without clear, visible reference to the previous publication. Prior publication may include the release of information in the public domain.

Falsification or Fabrication of Data

Data fabrication is the intentional misinterpretation of research results, reporting experiments that were never conducted, or the manipulation of accurate data to suit a desired outcome.

Image manipulation is a specific type of data manipulation and relates to e.g., duplication of parts within an image, or use of identical images to show different things.

Scilight Press takes issues of copyright infringement, plagiarism or other breaches of best practice Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing very seriously. We seek to protect our authors' rights and always investigate claims of plagiarism or misuse of published articles. Equally, we seek to protect the reputation of the journal against malpractice.

Once the manuscript is found to have committed publication misconduct, we will immediately impose the above-mentioned penalties.

We reserve the right to take action including, but not limited to: publishing an erratum or corrigendum (correction); rejecting the manuscript or withdrawing the published paper (Guidelines for retraction of articles-COPE Retraction guidelines); taking up the matter with the head of the department or dean of the author's institution and/or relevant academic bodies or societies; releasing all penalty documents in Scilight website.

It is important to be reminded that Research Misconduct is purposeful misconduct and as such does not include honest error or differences of opinion which may occur at time to time in research and which can generally be corrected or outlined at the time of publication.

6.2. Post-Publication

The correspondence provides access to the post-publication conversation. If readers have concerns about any of the stories published, they can write a letter to the editor. Erratum, correction, and retraction can be used to remedy any errors or faults detected in the article. For significant concerns that potentially impact the reliability of the research, the editor will initiate an investigation to determine how the concern will be addressed. Original authors and reviewers will be included in the investigation as needed. The editor will strive to complete investigations within 60 days of reporting. Outcomes of the investigation may include:

• No Change
• Correction:
  1) Article is updated, including publication metadata
  2) Correction notice is issued in the next issue of the journal
• Retraction:
  1) Article page is updated with retraction notice and reason for retraction
  2) A retraction notice is issued in the next issue of the journal

In the case of a correction or erratum, the peer-reviewed and revised document will be amended and re-published on our website, along with the posting of a Correction, after the update request has been accepted. Meanwhile, a link will be created between the correction/erratum article and the original article to make readers and other users/systems aware of the correction. The Retraction decisions are based on COPE Retraction Guidelines.

More key points are being processed following the guidance of COPE-Handling of post-publication critiques.

7. Artificial Intelligence (AI)

These policies have been introduced in response to the rise of generative AI—a type of artificial intelligence technology capable of producing text, images, audio, and synthetic data. Examples include ChatGPT, NovelAI, Jasper AI, Rytr AI, and DALL-E. As AI-assisted technologies become increasingly integrated into content creation, these policies aim to enhance transparency and provide clear guidance for authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and contributors.

Scilight Press is actively monitoring advancements in this field and will review and update these policies as needed.

7.1. For Authors

1. The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Scientific Writing

Where authors use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, these technologies should only be used to improve the readability and language of the work. Applying the technology should be done with human oversight and control. Authors should carefully review and edit the result because AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete, or biased. The authors are ultimately responsible and accountable for the contents of the work.

Authors should disclose in their manuscript the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies, and a statement will appear in the published work. Declaring the use of these technologies supports transparency and trust between authors, readers, reviewers, editors, and contributors and facilitates compliance with the terms of use of the relevant tool or technology.

Authors should not list AI and AI-assisted technologies as an author or co-author, nor cite AI as an author. Authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to and performed by humans. Each (co-) author is accountable for ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Authorship requires the ability to approve the final version of the work and agree to its submission. Authors are also responsible for ensuring that the work is original, that the stated authors qualify for authorship, and that the work does not infringe third-party rights, and they should familiarize themselves with Publication Ethics before they submit.

2. The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Tools in Figures, Images, and Artwork

We do not permit the use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create or alter images in submitted manuscripts. This may include enhancing, obscuring, moving, removing, or introducing a specific feature within an image or figure. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if and as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. Image forensics tools or specialized software might be applied to submitted manuscripts to identify suspected image irregularities.

The only exception is if the use of AI or AI-assisted tools is part of the research design or research methods (such as in AI-assisted imaging approaches to generate or interpret the underlying research data, for example, in the field of biomedical imaging). If this is done, such use must be described in a reproducible manner in the methods section. This should include an explanation of how the AI or AI-assisted tools were used in the image creation or alteration process, and the name of the model or tool, version and extension numbers, and manufacturer. Authors should adhere to the AI software’s specific usage policies and ensure correct content attribution. Where applicable, authors could be asked to provide pre-AI-adjusted versions of images and/or the composite raw images used to create the final submitted versions for editorial assessment.

The use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools in the production of artwork, such as for graphical abstracts, is not permitted. The use of generative AI in the production of cover art may, in some cases be allowed if the author obtains prior permission from the journal editor and publisher, can demonstrate that all necessary rights have been cleared for the use of the relevant material, and ensures that there is correct content attribution.

7.2. For Reviewers

The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Journal Peer Review Process

When a researcher is invited to review another researcher’s paper, the manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Reviewers should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool, as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.

This confidentiality requirement extends to the peer review report as it may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, reviewers should not upload their peer review reports into an AI tool, even if it is just for the purpose of improving language and readability.

Peer review is at the heart of the scientific ecosystem, and Scilight Press abides by the highest standards of integrity in this process. Reviewing a scientific manuscript is a responsibility that can only be attributed to humans. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by reviewers to assist in the scientific review of a paper as the critical thinking and original assessment needed for peer review is outside of the scope of this technology, and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The reviewer is responsible and accountable for the content of the review report.

Scilight’s AI author policy states that authors are allowed to use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process before submission, but only to improve the language and readability of their paper and with the appropriate disclosure, as per our instructions in the Instruction for Authors. Reviewers can find such disclosure at the bottom of the paper in a separate section before the list of references.

7.3. For Editors

The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Journal Editorial Process

A submitted manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Editors should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool, as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.

This confidentiality requirement extends to all communication about the manuscript including any notification or decision letters, as they may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, editors should not upload their letters into an AI tool, even if it is just to improve language and readability.

Peer review is at the heart of the scientific ecosystem, and Scilight abides by the highest standards of integrity in this process. Managing the editorial evaluation of a scientific manuscript implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. Editors should not use generative AI or AI-assisted technologies to assist in the evaluation or decision-making process of a manuscript as the critical thinking and original assessment needed for this work is outside of the scope of this technology, and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The editor is responsible and accountable for the editorial process, the final decision, and the communication thereof to the authors.

Scilight Press states that authors can use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process before submission, but only to improve the language and readability of their paper and with the appropriate disclosure, as per our instructions in the Instruction for Authors. Editors can find such disclosure at the bottom of the paper in a separate section before the list of references. If an editor suspects that an author or a reviewer has violated our AI policies, they should inform the publisher.

8. Research Ethics and Consent

Scilight Press fully adheres to the Core practices and the Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The Editors of this journal are obligated to assist the scientific community in all aspects of publishing ethics, including plagiarism. As such, we endeavor to ensure a transparent and quality peer review process. Authors should conform to the publication ethics.

For more details, please refer to Scilight Press Publishing Ethics.

8.1. Research Involving Human Participants

When reporting on research involving human subjects, human material, human tissues, or human data, authors must declare that the investigations were conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki of 1975 (revised in 2013). According to point 23 of this declaration, approval from the local Institutional Review Board (IRB) or other appropriate ethics committee must be obtained before undertaking the research to ensure compliance with national and international guidelines. At minimum, a statement including the project identification code, date of approval, and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board must be provided in the article’s “Institutional Review Board Statement” section.

For non-interventional studies like surveys and social media research, participants must be fully informed about anonymity, the research purpose, data usage, and associated risks. Ethical approval from an appropriate committee is mandatory. If not needed, authors must provide an exemption or cite relevant legislation. Exemption details, including the committee's name and reasons, should be stated in the 'Institutional Review Board Statement' section.

Authors must obtain written informed consent for publication from participating patients. Individual participant data should be described thoroughly, but private identifying information need not be included unless relevant to the research (e.g., photographs showing specific symptoms). Patient initials or personal identifiers must not be present in any images. Authors must obtain signed informed consent for publication from patients (or their relatives/guardians) before submitting manuscripts containing case details, personal information, or patient images to a Scilight Journal. Patient details should be anonymized where possible, omitting specific age, ethnicity, or occupation if irrelevant to conclusions. A blank permission form template (without patient names or signatures) must be submitted. Submissions not meeting these requirements may be rejected by editors.

For publishing in Scilight Journals, consent, permission, or release forms should grant unlimited permission for publication in all formats (print, electronic, online), sublicensed versions (including translations and derived works), and other products under Open Access (OA) license. To ensure privacy, refrain from sending signed forms. The journal may request signed forms if needed.

Additional scrutiny may occur for studies involving vulnerable groups. The Editorial Office may request documentary evidence (blank consent forms, ethics board discussion documents). Studies categorizing groups by race, ethnicity, gender, disability, or disease should explain the necessity of such categorization in the article.

8.2. Research Involving Cell Lines

In research conducting using cell lines, the methods section must specify the origin of any cell lines used. For established cell lines, state their provenance and provide references to published papers or commercial sources. If using previously unpublished de novo cell lines, including those obtained from another laboratory, provide details of institutional review board or ethics committee approval. Additionally, confirm written informed consent if the cell line is of human origin.

8.3. Research Involving Animals

For animal research, authors must ensure the welfare of vertebrate and higher invertebrate species used for research, education, and testing. Detailed information on the ethical treatment of animals should be provided, potentially using the ARRIVE checklist for manuscript submission. Authors are encouraged to consult the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals (2020) for anesthesia and euthanasia best practices.

For studies with client-owned animals, authors must obtain informed consent from owners and adhere to high standards of veterinary care.

Authors are advised to comply with the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction and consult the IUCN red list index of threatened species Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

Researchers from countries without legal requirements should refer to the Basel Declaration, The International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (ICLAS), Association for the Study of Animal Behavior, and International Association of Veterinary Editors' Consensus Author Guidelines on Animal Ethics.

If a study was granted exemption or did not require ethics approval, this information should be explicitly stated in the manuscript.

Exemption or lack of ethics approval should be detailed in the manuscript, and authors are responsible for the accuracy of the provided statements. The Editor-in-Chief may reject submissions that do not meet these guidelines.

8.4. Research Involving Plants

Scilight Press emphasizes stewardship, transparency, and adherence to governance in specimen collection, experimentation, and field studies. The journal provides the following guidelines:

• Field studies involving genetically engineered plants must comply with national or local legislation. If applicable, manuscripts should include a statement detailing relevant permissions and/or licenses.
• Authors using genetic plant resources obtained from local suppliers or collectors, such as species from protected areas or medically important endangered species, must conduct experiments in accordance with the Nagoya Protocol (part of the Convention on Biological Diversity).
• Authors investigating quarantine organisms (e.g., harmful or pest organisms, including plant pathogens) should follow national legislation and inform the relevant National Plant Protection Organization of new findings before publication. Additional information is available through the International Plant Protection Convention.

For each submitted manuscript, genetic information and origin must be provided. For research involving rare and non-model plants (excluding typical model plants like Arabidopsis thaliana, Nicotiana benthamiana, or Oryza sativa), voucher specimens should be deposited in an accessible herbarium or museum. Vouchers may be requested for future verification of material identity, especially if taxonomic rearrangements occur. Details such as GPS coordinates, collection date, and parts used should be provided. Waivers can be considered for rare, threatened, or endangered species, but authors must explain this in the cover letter.

Editors reserve the right to reject submissions that do not meet these requirements.

8.5. Dual Use Research of Concern

Scilight Press adheres to the practical framework outlined in the Guidance for Editors: Research, Audit, and Service Evaluations provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Manuscripts reporting research that could pose significant public health or national security threats must clearly indicate such risks. Potential dual-use research of concern, including areas such as biosecurity, nuclear and chemical threats, or research with military applications, should be explained in the cover letter upon submission. For these manuscripts to undergo peer review, the benefits to the general public or public health must outweigh the associated risks. Authors are responsible for complying with relevant national and international laws.

8.6. Sex and Gender in Research

We encourage authors to adhere to the 'Sex and Gender Equity in Research – SAGER – guidelines' and incorporate sex and gender considerations where relevant. It is essential to accurately differentiate between sex (biological attribute) and gender (shaped by social and cultural factors) to avoid confusion. Article titles and abstracts should indicate which sex(es) the study applies to. In the background section, authors should discuss whether sex and/or gender differences may be expected; describe how they were accounted for in the study design; provide disaggregated data by sex and/or gender when appropriate; and discuss respective results. If a sex and/or gender analysis was not conducted, authors should provide the rationale in the Discussion section. We recommend that authors consult the full guidelines before submission.

8.7. Clinical Trials Registration

1) Registration

Scilight Press adheres to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) guidelines, requiring and recommending that clinical trials be registered in a public registry for trials before the first patient enrollment. This condition applies to all studies involving participant randomization and group classification, not just those involving hospitals or pharmaceuticals. Authors should pre-register clinical trials with an international clinical trials register and cite the registration number in the Methods section. Suitable databases include clinicaltrials.gov, the EU Clinical Trials Register, and those listed by the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.

Approval from a local, regional, or national review body does not substitute for prospective clinical trial registration. Scilight Press reserves the right to decline papers lacking trial registration for further peer review. However, if the study protocol has been published before enrollment, registration can be waived with proper citation of the published protocol.

2) CONSORT Statement

Scilight Press mandates the submission of a completed CONSORT 2010 checklist and flow diagram when reporting the results of a randomized trial. Authors must provide the checklist and flow diagram as a condition of submission. Templates for these can be accessed on the CONSORT website. Additionally, authors should ensure that their article reports the content addressed by each item of the checklist.

8.8. Borders and Territories

Scilight Press recognizes that potential disputes over borders and territories may impact authors when describing their research or providing addresses for author or editor correspondence. Respecting these sensitivities is of utmost importance to us. In situations where disputes or complaints arise, our editorial team is committed to finding an amicable solution that is acceptable to the parties involved.

Scilight Press maintains neutrality regarding jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

9. Citations

Scilight Press maintains strict guidelines on citation practices to ensure integrity and avoid manipulation. Research and non-research articles must cite relevant literature to support claims made. Excessive self-citation, coordinated self-citation efforts, or gratuitous citation of articles from the submitting journal are inappropriate and may lead to rejection of the article and possible reporting to authors' institutions.

Authors should follow these guidelines:

• Statements relying on external sources should be cited.
• Original works should be cited instead of derivations.
• Citations must accurately support statements in the manuscript.
• Authors should only cite sources they have read.
• Preference should not be given to self-citation or citations from friends, peers, or affiliated institutions.
• Avoid citing solely from one country or using an excessive number of citations for one point.
• Peer-reviewed sources should be preferred.
• Advertisements or advertorial material should not be cited.

Authors are encouraged to adhere to these guidelines to ensure fair and ethical citation practices.

10. Publication Policies

At Scilight Press, we are dedicated to advancing the principles of open research. Our publication policies are designed to enable authors to maximize the openness of their research while supporting compliance with the OA requirements set forth by their funding bodies and institutions.

10.1. Data Availability

Scilight journals aim to publish both experimental and observational research. Submission of study protocols is highly recommended, alongside the statistical codes underpinning the results (ideally available in web repositories, i.e., GitHub, and OSF). Results should be reported alongside measures of uncertainty (confidence or credible intervals), with emphasis on the effect size rather than “statistical significance”. Categorizing of continuous data is not recommended. Authors should clearly state how missing data and multiple testing were handled and the software used to perform statistical analyses should be mentioned in the statistical section, including non-routine packages/commands. Sensitivity analyses are encouraged to assess the robustness of the results.

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data when submitting their manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.

10.2. Copyright and Permission to Reproduce Material

If the article includes any previously published material (including figures/diagrams, or short extracts, or content taken from websites), the author(s) must first obtain written permission of the copyright owner. The copyright owner is usually the publisher (for material taken from journal or proceedings articles), website owner/company (for material taken from websites) or the author or their employer (if the work is unpublished). Some publishers will also require that you seek the permission of the original author(s). You will need to check the terms of the publisher’s permission.

We ask you to submit written evidence:

• Confirming that all necessary permissions have been obtained by providing the actual written permission granted by the copyright owner, or
• Indicating that permission is not required, e.g., where the material is available under one of the Creative Commons licenses, which allow commercial reuse and suits the purpose for which you want to reuse the content.

For more details, please check our OA Access Policy.

10.3. Intellectual Property and Author Rights

In adherence to the principles of OA publishing and to facilitate widespread distribution, authors submitting to Scilight journals are under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0). This commitment to OA and the utilization of Creative Commons Licenses aligns with our mission to enhance the accessibility and impact of scholarly work within the academic community and beyond, which allows users to unrestrictedly read, print, download, disseminate, reproduce, alter, transform, or build upon the article, including for commercial and non-commercial purposes, as long as the original author is credited. For more information on Copyright Permission, click here.

Author Rights and Responsibilities:

• Intellectual Property Ownership:

Authors affirm that the submitted manuscript (and any accompanying materials) represents their original intellectual property, and they have not transferred the copyright to any third party.

• Integrity Assurance:

Authors certify that the manuscript contains no plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or manipulated citations and conforms to Scilight Press authorship policies.

• Copyright Permissions:

Authors confirm that appropriate permissions have been secured from copyright holders for any copyrighted tables, figures, data, text, etc., reproduced in the manuscript.

• Confidentiality Agreement:

Authors commit to keeping confidential all communications, comments, or reports exchanged between authors and reviewers or editors. The privacy of these interactions is paramount to the integrity of the review process.

10.4. Third-Party Permissions

Third-party content refers to any material that is owned, either explicitly or implicitly, by someone other than the authors. This may include the authors’ previous work, content contributed by co-authors, work created by external parties, or external data sources. Authors intending to use third-party content in their research must fully understand the associated copyright considerations and reuse conditions. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory before submitting any work that incorporates third-party content.

Authors are responsible for securing the necessary permissions to reuse third-party material in their articles. Such materials may include, but are not limited to, text, illustrations, photographs, tables, datasets, audio recordings, videos, film stills, screenshots, or musical notation.

The use of short text excerpts and certain other materials may be permitted under "fair use" or similar provisions, typically for purposes such as criticism or review, without formal permission. However, for any content not covered by these exceptions, authors must obtain written permission from the copyright holders before submission.

10.5. Acknowledgments

The Acknowledgments section is intended to recognize individuals who contributed significantly to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship. It is also the appropriate place to disclose relevant funding information. Contributors who qualify for authorship, as outlined in our authorship criteria, should not be listed in this section.

In this section, you can acknowledge any support not covered by the author’s contribution or funding sections. This may include administrative and technical assistance or in-kind donations, such as materials used for experiments. Authors should obtain permission to acknowledge from all those mentioned in the Acknowledgments section.

Acknowledgments should be concise and avoid thanking anonymous referees or editors, using unnecessary words, or including overly enthusiastic expressions of gratitude.

11. Digital Preservation Policy

To guarantee permanent archival of scholarly outputs, all articles published in Scilight Press journals are deposited into the National Library of Australia.

Scilight Press maintains submission files, including manuscripts, supplementary materials, and peer-review correspondence post-publication. For manuscripts not accepted for publication, we will honor authors' requests to delete submission files.

12. Ethical Guidelines for Journal Editors

We ask all journal editors to make every reasonable effort to adhere to the following ethical guidelines for articles submitted for peer review in Scilight journals:

• Journal editors should give unbiased consideration to each manuscript submitted for publication. They should judge each on its merits, without regard to race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author(s).
• Journal editors must keep the peer-review process confidential. They must not share information about a manuscript with anyone outside of the peer-review process.
• If a journal editor receives a credible allegation ofmisconduct by an author, reviewer, or journal editor, then they have a duty to investigate the matter with Scilight.
• Journal editors may reject a submitted manuscript without formal peer review if they consider it inappropriate for the journal and outside its scope.
• Journal editors should delegate the peer review of any original self-authored research article to a member of the editorial board as appropriate.
• If a journal editor receives convincing evidence that the main substance or conclusions of an article published in the journal are incorrect, then, in consultation with the publisher, the journal editor should ensure the publication of an appropriate notice of correction.
• Any data or analysis presented in a submitted manuscript should not be used in a journal editor's own research without the consent of the author.
• Keep submission and peer review details confidential, as required. Do not upload files, images or information from unpublished manuscripts into databases or tools that do not guarantee confidentiality, are accessible by the public and/or may store or use this information for their own purposes (for example, generative AI tools like ChatGPT).

13. Appeals and Complaints

The procedure covers appeals concerning editorial decisions, complaints about procedural matters like significant delays in paper handling, and concerns related to publication ethics. Authors who disagree with an editorial decision can submit a formal appeal to the Editorial Office, providing their reasons. The matter will be addressed promptly in accordance with COPE Guidelines. Initially, the issue should be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief(s) responsible for the journal or the Editor who handled the paper. If the complaint involves these individuals, contact the journal editor directly. (Refer to the contacts page on the journal's homepage for details. If no publishing contact is listed, send your query to info@sciltp.com.)

 

Update in May 2025