Publication Ethics Statement

In order to strengthen the academic integrity construction, standardize the process of paper submission, editing, publishing, and resist academic misconduct，Lithologic Reserviors follows the recognized publishing ethics. The editors, authors and reviewers should perform the following duties.

Editors’ duties

1.   Editors should deal with every manuscript fairly and justly, and make a decision of accept/reject according to aim & scope of journal, novelty & academic nature of manuscript. Timely register, submit to peer-review after passing initial review, edit and publish after passing final review.

2.   In the process of editing and publishing, editors should not only pay attention to publishing standards, but also respect the author's views and style of writing. The author's consent should be obtained for the key changes of academic views.

3.   'Double blind' evaluation system is adopted，and the true review logs are recorded. It is obligated to keep confidential the information of the author and reviewers, the author's research results and the intermediate data of manuscript processing.

Authors’ duties

1.   Author should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. The author should not publish manuscripts describing same research result in more than one journal.

2.   Manuscripts should follow the submission instruction of the journal. The manuscript must be the original work without academic dishonorable behavior such as plagiarism, data falsification, etc. The contents of the manuscript do not contain confidential information. Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in their research work.

3.   All named authors meet the journal’s requirements for authorship; do not add or remove authors at will.

4.   State the funding information related to the research in the manuscript, and do not write other funding information unrelated to the research.

5.   Respect the evaluation opinions of the reviewers. In case of any objection, submit a written statement to the editorial office, and make detailed explanation for each review opinion.

Reviewers’ duties

1.   Reviewers should review manuscripts in time according to the agreement. If they can't review on time for some reasons, they should inform the editorial office in time and return the review.

2.   Reviewers must be objective, fair, scientific and accurate in their evaluation of manuscripts, and should express their opinions through arguments.

3.   Reviewers should keep the content of the manuscripts confidential and not use the authors' research results illegally.

4.   The reviewers shall confirm the data, figures and other relevant sources in the manuscripts, and inform the editors if any plagiarism or multiple contributions are found.

5.    When there is conflict of interest between the reviewer and the author, funding unit or other related parties, the reviewer should take the initiative to avoid reviewing the manuscript.

Rejection, withdrawal and correction

1.   In the process of dealing with manuscripts, editors should carry out two times of academic misconduct detection, one is to confirm that the relevant contents have not been published before submission for blind review, including conference papers, journal papers and graduation papers; the other is to confirm that the relevant contents have not been published before the final review.

2.   During peer review, if it is found that the manuscript is identical with the published article, or the same data or figures may constitute repeated publication, the editor should reject the manuscript.

3.   After online priority publishing or issue in print, the article should be withdrawn when it is confirmed that the article has plagiarized research results, fabricated data or author breached confidentiality rules and non-disclosure agreements, etc. The editorial office would issue the withdrawal statement, notify the author and his affiliation, and notify the cooperation database to delete online copies and terminate the dissemination of the article.

4.  If some of the contents of the journal are proved to be misleading (especially due to honest mistakes), and the list of authors is incorrect (that is, competent authors are ignored or those who do not meet the copyright requirements are included), etc., the editorial department should consider publishing corrections.