ASAC adopts a set of ethics that controls the performance of all parties involved in the process of scientific publications. They are adopted from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines.

It classifies the practices and ethics according to each involved personnel as follows:

1- Ethics and Responsibilities of Authors:

• The term author/s represents the researcher/s who created the manuscript submitted to the journal. If multiple authors are involved, one of them is designated as a major author and should be the one who communicates with the journal and his partners.
• The author/s are responsible for the content of the manuscript.
• Authors should follow the manuscript preparation guidelines posted on the Journal website.
• Author/s must sign a declaration that indicates that the work is original, not submitted or published in other publishing entities and that the author/s will respond professionally to reviewers and editor/s comments.
• Author/s should acknowledge any financial support provided during the research preparation in addition to help from persons who are not listed as co-authors.
• Author/s should avoid plagiarism and overuse of self-references.
• Author/s should declare any conflict of interest including, but not limited to, promoting products of financial supporters.

2- Ethics and Responsibilities of Editors:

• Editor/s must judge the primary merit of a submitted manuscript professionally which fulfills the publication guidelines. Their decision to introduce the manuscript to reviewers should not be biased.
• Editor/s should follow up the reviewer to ensure that they abide to the journal reviewing publication timetable.
• Editor/s should deal with manuscripts confidentially, particularly if any misconduct is detected.
• If any conflict of interest appears for an editor, the editor-in-chief should forward the manuscript responsibilities to another editor.
• Editor/s must select reviewers carefully to ensure a proper and fair reviewing process.
• Editor/s must not select reviewers suggested by author/s to avoid bias.
• Editor/s should professionally consider any comments or appeals submitted by authors regarding their decisions and reply to such comments.

3- Ethics and Responsibilities of Reviewers:

• Reviewer/s should handle any manuscript confidentially.
• Reviewer should complete his/her review within the time frame proposed by the Journal. If the reviewer/s could not handle the manuscript within the proposed time, then he should decline to review it.
• Reviewer/s should decline to review a manuscript if a conflict of interest arises.
• The reviewer/s should evaluate the manuscript objectively and give reasons for their specific judgment.
• Reviewer/s should report any similarity discovered in the manuscript with already published material.
• Reviewer/s should alert the editor if any scientific misconduct is discovered including, but not limited to, plagiarism and/or data fabrication.

4- Unethical Practices:

Unethical practices include, but are not limited, to data fabrication, duplicate submission, deliberate neglect in citing related work, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, conflict of interest, and omission of someone who contributed to the work without his/her permission.

5- Handling Unethical Practices:

The regulations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines is the main reference for unethical complaints.

• If any cases of unethical practices were reported, the editor/s must follow it properly. If an anonymous or a third party submits a complaint about a manuscript, the editor/s must examine the evidence provided in the complaint. Editor/s and reviewers may be consulted to decide the complaint.
• The editor/s should inform the person in question (author/s or reviewer) about the complaint and be given the right to respond.
• Editor/s are not allowed to investigate by themselves. Rather, Institutions of the involved party are responsible for investigating the claim (such as claiming that the work was not conducted at the site mentioned in the manuscript).
• Based on examining the claim, the journal should issue its decision regarding the claim. It could be issuing a correction of the manuscript or announcing the withdrawal of the manuscript from the site due to unethical practices. The institution of the questioned person should be informed of the misconduct.
• If the claim indicates that the manuscript was submitted and/or published in another publishing entity, the editor must contact them and inform them of the claim.
• The editorial board may decide to ban the person of interest from publishing or reviewing future work in the Journal. Such a person should be officially informed of the decision.