Symphony

SYMPHONY
PUBLISHING

Publication Ethics

All journals published by Symphony adhere to the core practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and address cases of research and publication misconduct in alignment with these standards.

Ethical Guidelines for Authors

Authors are expected to adhere to the following ethical guidelines:

  1. Dual Publication and Submission: Symphony journals do not permit the dual publication of the same material in peer-reviewed literature or the simultaneous submission of the same material to more than one journal.

  2. Integrity and Plagiarism: Symphony journals have zero tolerance for plagiarism, data or figure manipulation, providing knowingly false information, inaccurate author attributions, failure to disclose conflicts of interest, and fraud. This list is not exhaustive; for further guidance on what constitutes such actions, please refer to resources available at the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

  3. Conflict of Interest: Authors must disclose all relationships or interests that could inappropriately influence or bias their work. Potential conflicts of interest include, but are not limited to, financial interests (such as memberships, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, grants or other funding, paid expert testimony, and patent-licensing arrangements) and non-financial interests (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, personal beliefs). Authors should declare any conflicts involving themselves or their co-authors in the ‘Comments for the Editor’ field via the online submission system. If no conflicts exist, authors should state: ‘The authors declare no conflicts of interest.’

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Editors

Journal editors at Symphony are expected to adhere to the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, and to follow these ethical guidelines:

  1. Fair and Unbiased Peer Review: Editors should strive to ensure that the peer review process is fair, unbiased, and timely.

  2. Qualified Reviewers: Editors must ensure that all published research reports and reviews have been evaluated by suitably qualified reviewers.

  3. Independent Decision-Making: Decisions to accept or reject a paper should be based on the paper’s significance, originality, clarity, the study’s validity, and its relevance to the journal’s scope, free from interference by the journal owner/publisher or other third parties.

  4. Disclosure of Competing Interests: Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest before agreeing to review a submission.

  5. Confidentiality: The peer-review process should be kept confidential, and information or correspondence about a manuscript should not be shared with anyone outside of the peer review process.

Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

Reviewers for Symphony are strongly encouraged to comply with the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers and adhere to the following ethical standards:

  1. Subject Expertise: Reviewers should only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the necessary subject expertise and can complete the assessment in a timely manner.

  2. Confidentiality: Reviewers must respect the confidentiality of the peer-review process and not disclose any details of a manuscript or its review during or after the process, except those released by the journal.

  3. Ethical Use of Information: Information obtained during the peer-review process should not be used for personal gain or to advantage or disadvantage others.

  4. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must declare all potential conflicts of interest and seek advice from the journal if unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest.

  5. Impartiality: Reviews should not be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender, or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations.

  6. Constructive Feedback: Reviews should be objective and constructive, avoiding hostility, inflammatory remarks, and libellous or derogatory personal comments.

  7. Reciprocity: Recognizing that peer review is a reciprocal endeavor, reviewers should undertake their fair share of reviewing and complete reviews in a timely manner.

  8. Accuracy of Information: Reviewers should provide accurate personal and professional information that truly represents their expertise.

  9. Integrity: Impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct and is strictly prohibited.

Allegations of Misconduct

Human or Animal Subjects Research

Research involving human or animal subjects must ensure all procedures comply with relevant laws and institutional guidelines. Manuscripts reporting clinical trials should include the trial registration number at the end of the abstract. Authors must obtain review and approval (or review and waiver) from their Institutional Review Board (IRB) prior to manuscript submission if the work involves human or animal subjects. For multisite research, approval must be obtained from the IRB at each participating institution.

For research involving human subjects, authors must ensure compliance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, as revised in 2013. A statement confirming that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects should be included in the manuscript. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed. A statement of IRB approval or waiver (including the reason for waiver) or adherence to the Declaration of Helsinki must be included in the manuscript. For example: “All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code).”

For research involving animal subjects, all experiments should comply with the ARRIVE guidelines and be conducted in accordance with the U.K. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 and its associated guidelines, the EU Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, or the U.S. Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. The manuscript must include a statement identifying the institutional and/or licensing committee that approved the experiments, along with relevant details. If no animal ethics committee is available, the research’s ethics will be evaluated by reviewers and editors. Authors should provide a statement justifying the work from an ethical perspective.

 

Publication Fees

Symphony publishes all articles under the Gold Open Access model. To provide free access to readers and cover publication costs, we charge a one-time Article Processing Charge (APC) for accepted papers. This fee is independent of article length or supplementary materials. Some content types (e.g., Editorials, Corrections, Addendums, Retractions, Comments) are published free of charge.

Each journal’s APC is clearly displayed on its homepage. The APC covers work by various departments:

  • Editorial Screening
  • Editorial Operations
  • Article Production
  • Proofreading
  • Editorial Quality Assurance
  • Journal Development
  • Technology Teams

These departments manage all aspects of the publication process, from quality control and peer review to production and promotion. APC amounts may vary depending on the specific journal.

Plagiarism Detection

Symphony uses Crossref’s Similarity Check service, powered by iThenticate software, to detect textual similarities. This tool provides editors with a user-friendly method to identify potential plagiarism. Our journals consider a text similarity below 20% acceptable. The system compares submitted manuscripts against both web resources and the CrossRef database. Authors must minimize word reuse, properly credit sources, and accurately cite all references.

Publication Fees

Symphony publishes all articles under the Gold Open Access model. To provide free access to readers and cover publication costs, we charge a one-time Article Processing Charge (APC) for accepted papers. This fee is independent of article length or supplementary materials. Some content types (e.g., Editorials, Corrections, Addendums, Retractions, Comments) are published free of charge.

Each journal’s APC is clearly displayed on its homepage. The APC covers work by various departments:

  • Editorial Screening
  • Editorial Operations
  • Article Production
  • Proofreading
  • Editorial Quality Assurance
  • Journal Development
  • Technology Teams

These departments manage all aspects of the publication process, from quality control and peer review to production and promotion. APC amounts may vary depending on the specific journal.

Plagiarism Detection

Symphony uses Crossref’s Similarity Check service, powered by iThenticate software, to detect textual similarities. This tool provides editors with a user-friendly method to identify potential plagiarism. Our journals consider a text similarity below 20% acceptable. The system compares submitted manuscripts against both web resources and the CrossRef database. Authors must minimize word reuse, properly credit sources, and accurately cite all references.

Publication Fees

Symphony publishes all articles under the Gold Open Access model. To provide free access to readers and cover publication costs, we charge a one-time Article Processing Charge (APC) for accepted papers. This fee is independent of article length or supplementary materials. Some content types (e.g., Editorials, Corrections, Addendums, Retractions, Comments) are published free of charge.

Each journal’s APC is clearly displayed on its homepage. The APC covers work by various departments:

  • Editorial Screening
  • Editorial Operations
  • Article Production
  • Proofreading
  • Editorial Quality Assurance
  • Journal Development
  • Technology Teams

These departments manage all aspects of the publication process, from quality control and peer review to production and promotion. APC amounts may vary depending on the specific journal.