Public Ethics

1. Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts represent original scholarly work. Text, concepts, equations, experimental methods, datasets, figures, photographs, microscopy images, diagrams, software, numerical models, coating formulations, and other materials derived from external sources must be properly acknowledged and cited.

Plagiarism, inappropriate paraphrasing, unattributed copying, or misleading reuse of previously published material is unacceptable.

Accuracy and Research Integrity

Authors must report experimental observations, electrochemical measurements, surface analyses, corrosion rates, coating properties, computational results, statistical analyses, and other research findings accurately and honestly.

Fabrication, falsification, selective omission, inappropriate manipulation, or misrepresentation of research results is prohibited.

Multiple or Concurrent Submission

Manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Corrosion and Coatings must not be simultaneously under consideration by another journal.

Authors should disclose closely related manuscripts, conference papers, reports, preprints, theses, datasets, or previous publications that substantially overlap with the submitted work.

Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial intellectual or scholarly contributions to the conception, methodology, investigation, analysis, interpretation, or preparation of the research.

Guest authorship, honorary authorship, gift authorship, purchased authorship, and ghost authorship are not acceptable.

Corresponding Author Responsibility

The corresponding author must ensure that all listed authors have reviewed and approved the submitted manuscript, agreed to its submission, and accepted responsibility for their respective contributions.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose financial, professional, institutional, commercial, personal, or other relationships that could reasonably influence or appear to influence the research or interpretation of findings.

Funding Disclosure

All research grants, industry sponsorship, laboratory support, equipment support, material supply, institutional funding, or other relevant financial assistance should be transparently acknowledged.

Errors after Publication

Authors who identify a significant error or inaccuracy in their published research should promptly inform the editorial office and cooperate in issuing an appropriate correction, clarification, or retraction.

2. Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions must be based on scholarly quality, originality, methodological rigor, scientific validity, ethical integrity, relevance to the journal, and contribution to knowledge.

Commercial, institutional, financial, political, or personal interests must not improperly influence editorial decisions.

Fair and Impartial Evaluation

Manuscripts shall be evaluated without discrimination based on nationality, institutional affiliation, geographical origin, gender, ethnicity, professional seniority, personal beliefs, or other characteristics unrelated to scholarly merit.

Confidentiality

Editors must protect confidential information contained in submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, and editorial correspondence. Unpublished information must not be disclosed to unauthorized parties.

Conflict of Interest

Editors should withdraw from handling manuscripts when personal, academic, financial, institutional, or professional relationships could compromise or appear to compromise their impartial judgment.

Peer-Review Integrity

Editors are responsible for selecting qualified and independent reviewers and for maintaining a fair, confidential, and professionally managed peer-review process.

Editorial Decisions

Acceptance, revision, resubmission, or rejection decisions should be supported by scholarly considerations. Reviewer recommendations inform the decision, while final responsibility remains with the authorized journal editor.

3. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for peer review are confidential scholarly documents. Reviewers must not reproduce, distribute, upload, publicly discuss, or disclose manuscript content to unauthorized persons.

Objectivity

Reviews should be based on scientific and scholarly considerations. Comments should be constructive, specific, respectful, and supported by appropriate reasoning.

Appropriate Expertise

Reviewers who believe that a manuscript substantially falls outside their expertise should notify the editor and decline the review where appropriate.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must disclose relationships or interests that may influence their assessment and should decline review when impartiality could reasonably be questioned.

Misappropriation of Ideas

Unpublished data, corrosion mechanisms, coating formulations, methods, experimental designs, computational models, or technical concepts obtained through peer review must not be used for personal, academic, or commercial advantage prior to publication.

Citation Ethics

Reviewers must not pressure authors to cite the reviewer's publications, the journal's publications, or unrelated literature solely to increase citations.

4. Corrosion and Coatings Research Ethics

Experimental Integrity

Corrosion and coating experiments should be designed, conducted, and reported with sufficient methodological detail to allow meaningful scientific assessment.

Authors should accurately report relevant test environments, specimen preparation, exposure time, temperature, pH, electrolyte composition, coating thickness, surface preparation, environmental conditions, and other variables that may materially affect results.

Electrochemical Data Integrity

Potentiodynamic polarization, electrochemical impedance spectroscopy, open-circuit potential, linear polarization, and other electrochemical measurements must be reported accurately.

Authors should not selectively remove measurements solely because they do not support the expected hypothesis. Exclusion of anomalous observations should have a scientifically justified basis.

Corrosion Rate and Performance Claims

Corrosion rates, inhibition efficiencies, coating protection efficiencies, polarization parameters, impedance parameters, and other performance indicators should be calculated using clearly described and scientifically appropriate methods.

Claims of superior corrosion resistance should be supported by appropriate experimental evidence and meaningful comparison.

Coating Formulation Transparency

Authors should provide sufficient information about coating composition, preparation, deposition, curing, treatment, thickness, substrate preparation, and testing conditions to permit meaningful scientific evaluation.

Proprietary information may be protected, but insufficient methodological transparency may limit the ability of editors and reviewers to assess scientific validity.

Surface and Microstructural Characterization

SEM, EDS/EDX, XRD, XPS, AFM, optical microscopy, profilometry, spectroscopy, and other characterization outputs must accurately represent the analyzed specimens.

Image processing must not introduce, remove, obscure, move, or selectively enhance scientifically relevant features.

Mechanical and Adhesion Testing

Hardness, adhesion, wear, scratch, tribological, tensile, impact, and related coating-performance tests should be reported using appropriate procedures and clearly stated test conditions.

Numerical and Computational Integrity

Computational corrosion, electrochemical modelling, finite-element analysis, multiphysics simulation, molecular modelling, artificial intelligence, and machine-learning studies should transparently report assumptions, inputs, boundary conditions, model parameters, validation, verification, uncertainty, and relevant limitations.

Industrial and Field Data

Research using corrosion-monitoring records, pipeline inspection data, failure reports, offshore data, plant information, or proprietary industrial datasets must respect applicable confidentiality agreements and publication permissions.

Hazardous Chemicals and Laboratory Safety

Research involving corrosive acids, alkalis, toxic substances, heavy metals, solvents, nanomaterials, or other hazardous materials should comply with appropriate laboratory, handling, storage, and waste-disposal requirements.

Environmental and Sustainability Claims

Claims such as environmentally friendly, green, sustainable, non-toxic, chromium-free, low-impact, or eco-friendly should be supported by scientific evidence rather than promotional terminology alone.

5. Research and Publication Misconduct

Plagiarism

The unattributed use of another person's text, concepts, data, equations, figures, experimental results, images, software, coating formulations, or intellectual contributions is prohibited.

Fabrication

Inventing experiments, corrosion measurements, coating-performance results, electrochemical data, microscopy images, numerical outputs, references, or other research information constitutes serious research misconduct.

Falsification

Manipulating experimental materials, instruments, procedures, raw data, surface images, electrochemical curves, numerical parameters, or test results in a way that misrepresents the research record is prohibited.

Duplicate and Redundant Publication

Substantially identical research should not be published in multiple journals without legitimate justification, transparent disclosure, and appropriate citation.

Citation Manipulation

Authors, reviewers, and editors must not engage in coercive, excessive, irrelevant, fabricated, or coordinated citation practices designed primarily to manipulate citation indicators.

Peer-Review Manipulation

False reviewer identities, fabricated reviews, manipulated reviewer contact information, compromised accounts, or coordinated attempts to improperly influence peer review constitute serious violations of publication ethics.

Image Manipulation

Microscopy images, surface photographs, micrographs, spectra, maps, contour plots, and related scientific images must not be manipulated in ways that alter or misrepresent research findings.

Data Manipulation

Selective alteration, removal, fabrication, or concealment of experimental measurements or computational data intended to produce more favorable results is unacceptable.

Handling Allegations

When credible concerns about misconduct arise, the journal may request raw data, laboratory records, original images, electrochemical files, numerical models, authorship documentation, or other supporting information.

Appropriate editorial action will depend on the evidence and seriousness of the issue.

6. Post-Publication Ethics

Corrections

When an error affects part of a published article but does not invalidate its principal findings, the journal may issue an appropriate correction or clarification.

Expressions of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued when credible questions arise regarding the integrity or reliability of a publication but sufficient evidence for a final determination is not yet available.

Retractions

An article may be retracted when there is clear evidence that its findings are unreliable because of serious error, fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, unethical research, duplicate publication, manipulated peer review, or another serious breach of research or publication integrity.

Purpose of Retraction

Retraction is intended to protect and correct the scholarly record, not to function primarily as punishment.

Transparency of the Scholarly Record

Corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, and other post-publication notices should remain clearly linked to the original article so readers can understand its current status.

Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders may raise legitimate concerns regarding editorial procedures, published research, conflicts of interest, or publication ethics.

Complaints and appeals should be considered fairly, confidentially, and on the basis of available evidence.

7. Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

AI Is Not an Author

Artificial intelligence systems, large language models, chatbots, image generators, and other AI-assisted technologies cannot be listed as authors or co-authors.

Authorship requires responsibility and accountability that can only be assumed by human contributors.

Human Author Responsibility

Human authors remain fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, integrity, references, equations, calculations, corrosion data, coating information, interpretations, and conclusions of all submitted content.

Disclosure of AI Use

Substantive use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in writing, coding, data processing, analysis, visualization, or image generation should be transparently disclosed where applicable.

Verification of AI Outputs

Authors must independently verify all AI-assisted outputs. Fabricated, inaccurate, nonexistent, or misleading references, equations, material properties, corrosion parameters, standards, numerical values, or technical claims are unacceptable.

AI and Peer-Review Confidentiality

Editors and reviewers must preserve manuscript confidentiality when considering the use of AI-assisted tools. Confidential manuscript information should not be transferred to systems when appropriate confidentiality and data protection cannot be assured.

Human Editorial Responsibility

Artificial intelligence may support selected editorial or technical processes, but final decisions regarding manuscript acceptance, rejection, correction, expression of concern, or retraction remain under human editorial responsibility.