1. Summary

Journal of Power Supply (JOPS) shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication, among others. In no case shall the journal encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place. In the event that the journal’s publisher or editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct relating to a published article in the journal, the publisher or editor shall follow the guidelines in dealing with allegations.

       2. Examples of Research Misconduct

Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the presentation of another person's work as the author's own, without proper acknowledgement of the source, with or without the creator's permission, intentionally or unintentionally.

Collusion

Collusion is a form of plagiarism. lt is an unauthorised and unattributed collaboration of authors in a piece of assessed work.

Falsification

Falsification is an attempt to present fictitious or distorted data, evidence, references, citations, or experimental results, and/or to knowingly make use of such material.

Cheating

Cheating is any attempt to obtain or to give assistance in a manuscript or an assessment without due acknowledgement. This includes submitting work which is not one's own.

Deceit

Deceit is dishonesty in order to achieve advantage. For example, by resubmitting one's own previously assessed work.

Personation

Personation is the assumption of the identity of another person with intent to deceive or gain unfair advantage.

Other behavior that may led to research misconduct

       3. Investigation and Identification of Research Misconduct

The journal has the responsibility to identification of and dealing with allegations of research misconduct. Any behavior be considered as research misconduct by the journal and clear allegations of research misconduct should be investigated and dealt by the investigation committee, which is leaded by the Editor-in-Chief. The investigation committee will produce a report of investigation by querying information, on-site inspection, experimental testing, inquiring relevant informed persons, listening to statements and defending, etc. The Editor-in-Chief will make a final decision according to the report.

       4. Dealing with Research Misconduct

A decision will be made by the Editor-in-Chief according to the following principles:

If the manuscript is under reviewing, the review process must be suspended immediately and the manuscript will be rejected. An investigation report and a warning letter will be sent to the authors.

If the manuscript is accepted but not published in final version, the manuscript will be rejected. An investigation report and a warning letter will be sent to the authors. The journal will not consider reviewing the authors` manuscripts in the following 5 years.

If the manuscript has been published in a certain issue, a statement of retraction will be published in the following issue, and the journal website. The web copy of the manuscript will be delated. An investigation report and a warning letter will be sent to the authors.

Malicious allegations of research misconduct will not be supported, and a warning letter will be sent to the informer.

If the informants hold objections to the conclusion and handling opinions, they can submit a written review application to the Journal within 5 working days from the date of receiving the notice (overdue will not be accepted), the Editor-in-Chief is responsible for organizing the review, and the review opinion will be given within 30 working days.