Code of Ethics
Icelandic Journal of Engineering.
Editorial Board
The board of the Association of Chartered Engineers in Iceland nominates four editorial board members for the journal. The composition of the editorial board should reflect the diversity and different disciplines of engineering and related fields. The theoretical knowledge of the editorial board shall be according to requirements made for a first-rate international scholarly journal. The editorial board works in accordance with the ethical code of the journal and that of the Association of Chartered Engineers in Iceland.
The editorial board has the right to decide whether articles are published or rejected.
An editorial representative works with the editorial board and communicates with authors, reviewers, and readers.
The Journal adheres to the Publication code of conduct as set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics, COPE.
Author's Responsibility
Authors who submit a scholarly article and request its publication must ensure the following:- The article being submitted is the author's original work
- The article has not been submitted to other journals for review or publication
- The article has not been previously published
- All authors have seen and approved the manuscript and have agreed to its submission to the journal. If you are not sure as to who should be listed as a co-author or in the Acknowledgement section, you can find out more on the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (www.icmje.org)
- Any conflicts of interest should be declared on submission
- All sources used in writing the article are cited, be they studies, other projects, or academic articles
- Permission has been obtained for the use of statistical data or other sources that may be subject to copyright
- Information has been provided regarding all sponsorships or funds provided for the relevant research or during the writing of the article
- Any suggested reviewers do not have a conflict of interest.
Originality and Plagiarism
When an article is submitted on the same subject as an older article by the same authors or a revised version, at least half of the text must differ from the previous work. The editorial board decides whether that condition has been met. Moreover, the previous article must be cited as a source.
Plagiarism, or any copying or rewriting of the work of others without correctly naming the source, leads to the rejection of an article. That also applies to the author's work, that is, using previous work without citing sources properly. The editorial board uses available tools, such as CrossCheck, to check for plagiarism.
The Peer-Review Process
Submitted articles must be peer-reviewed by at least two scholars. It is a double-blind peer review, where the identities of authors and reviewers are kept hidden. First and foremost, the editorial board goes by the conclusions of peer reviewers when assessing whether to publish an article, but when peer reviewers disagree with their conclusions, the editorial board makes the final decision.
Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections
Our journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity and transparency in the scientific publishing process. We recognize that, despite rigorous peer review and editorial scrutiny, issues may arise post-publication that require attention. This policy outlines the procedures for post-publication discussions, corrections, and updates.
We encourage readers, authors, and the broader scientific community to engage in constructive discussions on published articles. Comments can be submitted through our online platform, and authors are invited to respond to comments to foster open dialogue.
If errors, inaccuracies, or omissions are identified in a published article, authors are encouraged to promptly notify the editorial office with a detailed description of the issue. Upon verification, the editorial team will assess the severity of the issue. Minor corrections may be made directly to the article, and a note indicating the correction will be added. For more significant corrections, an erratum will be issued, providing clarification or additional information.
In cases of serious ethical concerns, data fabrication, or other severe issues compromising the reliability or validity of the work, the journal may issue a retraction. Retractions are reserved for instances where the article must be formally withdrawn from the published record.
Editorial notes may be added to articles to address specific issues, clarify content, or acknowledge additional contributors. These notes aim to provide context and enhance the overall understanding of the work.
The journal supports ongoing post-publication peer review. Readers and researchers are encouraged to submit formal critiques or assessments, contributing to the continuous evaluation of published work.
Data Sharing and Reproducibility
Our journal is committed to promoting transparency, openness, and high standard of research integrity. To enhance the reproducibility of research and facilitate the advancement of scientific knowledge, we have established the following policy on data sharing and reproducibility.
Authors are encouraged to share the raw data or datasets associated with their research upon publication of the article. The data should be made available through recognized data repositories or as supplementary materials accompanying the article.
Authors are encouraged to share the code used in data analysis or software development associated with the research. This facilitates the reproducibility of computational aspects of the study.
Authors should ensure that data sharing complies with ethical standards and regulations. Sensitivity to issues of privacy and confidentiality must be considered when sharing data.
Handling Complaints and Appeals
Our journal is committed to upholding the highest quality, fairness, and ethical standards in scholarly publishing. We value feedback from our authors, reviewers, and readers and have established the following policy to address complaints and appeals in a fair and transparent manner.
Authors, reviewers, or any concerned individuals are welcome to submit complaints regarding editorial or publishing processes. Complaints should be submitted in writing to the editorial office via sigrun@verktaekni.is
All complaints will be treated confidentially. Only individuals directly involved in addressing the complaint will have access to the information provided.
Upon receipt of a complaint, the editorial team will promptly acknowledge the submission and provide an estimated timeline for resolution. The editorial team will thoroughly investigate the complaint, involving relevant parties as necessary. A fair and unbiased assessment will be made.
The complainant will be kept informed of the progress and outcome of the investigation. Clear and transparent communication is paramount throughout the process.
Authors or reviewers dissatisfied with editorial decisions may submit an appeal in writing to the editorial office via verktaekni@verktaekni.is. Appeals should include a detailed explanation of the grounds for appeal. The editorial team will reconsider the original decision, considering the appeal and any additional information provided. The outcome of the reconsideration will be communicated to the appellant. The decision following the appeal process is final. However, the journal welcomes constructive feedback to continually improve our processes.