Ethical Statement

Ethics Statement

This document summarizes principles of ethics in research, publication, authorship, and peer review, based on COPE.

1. Research ethics

YUYAY upholds rigorous standards of scientific integrity and scholarly communication. The Editorial Board will reject any submission that violates fundamental ethical principles or fails to comply with internationally recognized good practices. YUYAY follows the recommendations of the COPE Core Practices and the Code of Conduct for Journal Editors issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

1.1 Research involving human participants

When manuscripts report research involving human beings, authors must explicitly state that procedures were conducted in accordance with ethical standards consistent with the Declaration of Helsinki and applicable regulations. Where relevant, the manuscript must include:

Informed consent from participants authorizing the use of data for study and publication purposes.
Confidential data handling: anonymization, privacy protection, and safeguarding measures.
Approval by an Institutional Ethics Committee or IRB, including details or reference codes where applicable.

1.2 Research involving animals

When research involves animals, compliance with welfare standards and current ethical protocols is required. YUYAY recommends following the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine), in addition to local regulatory frameworks. Where applicable, the manuscript must indicate approval by an institutional ethics committee (or equivalent body).

2. Publication ethics

YUYAY® promotes transparency, accountability, and rigor. In accordance with COPE, all submitted research must:

Be conducted and reported in an ethical and responsible manner.
Present results with honesty, without fabrication, falsification, or manipulation of data.
Describe methods clearly enough to enable verification and/or reproducibility (when applicable).
Be original, free of plagiarism, and not published or under simultaneous review elsewhere.
Clearly state collective responsibility of all authors for the publication’s content.
Reflect appropriate authorship–contribution alignment (avoiding honorary, ghost, or coerced authorship).
Provide detailed disclosure of funding sources and conflicts of interest.

2.1 Anti-plagiarism policy

All manuscripts submitted to YUYAY® may be screened using Turnitin & Compilatio Master+ or equivalent similarity-detection tools. If plagiarism, redundant publication, manipulation, or other misconduct is detected, the Editorial Board will proceed according to COPE recommendations, and the manuscript may be rejected or withdrawn from the process.

2.2 Corrections and retractions

If unethical conduct is identified during review or after publication, YUYAY will implement measures aligned with COPE: corrections (errata), editorial notes, expressions of concern, or retraction. The journal reserves the right to notify institutions, authorities, and/or other editors when necessary to protect scientific integrity.

3. Authorship criteria

YUYAY adopts authorship criteria aligned with the Council of Science Editors (CSE). Authorship is attributed to individuals who made substantial contributions to conception/design, data collection/analysis/interpretation, drafting or critical revision, final approval, and responsibility for the integrity of the work. All co-authors must review and approve the manuscript.

3.1 Roles and contributions

The manuscript must include an author contributions statement (e.g., “Author Contributions”), specifying the role of each co-author.

3.2 Order of authorship

The order of authors must reflect the level of contribution: the first author should correspond to the main contributor, and the last author may, where applicable, indicate senior responsibility or principal investigator. Authorship identification and order are the authors’ responsibility, not the Editorial Board, unless misconduct is suspected.

4. Peer review ethics

Peer review is carried out by external experts with expertise in the manuscript’s field and independent of the Editorial Board. Manuscripts under evaluation are confidential. Reviewers may not disclose, comment on, or use the information contained in submitted manuscripts.

Reviewers assess originality, quality, and relevance and provide constructive recommendations.
Reviewers must report suspected misconduct (plagiarism, manipulation, ethical issues) if identified.
Breach of confidentiality or misuse of information constitutes serious misconduct.

4.1 Conflicts of interest in peer review

If a reviewer declares or is found to have a conflict of interest, the Editorial Board may exclude the reviewer from the process and appoint alternative reviewers or apply additional safeguards.