Acta Petrologica et Mineralogica (also referred to as the Journal) strictly follows and earnestly implements the code of ethics for publication. This statement mainly expounds the publishing ethics policy and system of the Journal, aiming at preventing academic misconduct, establishing and improving the peer review, achievement confidentiality, information sharing and conflict of interest prevention policies of the Journal, ensuring the integrity of editors and publications, and maintaining the reputation of the academic journal. It provides references for authors, readers, editors and reviewers.

1  Responsibility

(1) Editor responsibilities

The Journal assigns a dedicated responsible editor to each manuscript. In order to ensure the fairness and justice of manuscript processing, the reasonableness and effectiveness of peer review process, and to strictly safeguard the academic level of the Journal, the responsible editor must refer to the strict “three reviews and three proofreading” process and peer review system.

The process of “three reviews and three proofreading” of manuscripts is: Initial review and repetition rate review by the editorial department, external review by two experts in the industry and master final review. After passing all of them, they enter the editing and typesetting stage, and strictly carry out three responsible editing proofreading and one production proofread the process.

The peer review method is single blind review, that is, no information of peer review experts is disclosed to the author.

(2) Author responsibilities

The author shall ensure that the research results and data of this paper are authentic and reliable, and there are no problems such as forgery, tampering, plagiarism or multiple submission of one draft. The paper should give an objective evaluation of others’ research results, and correctly cite them in the paper. The author shall ensure that the submitted paper is free of state secrets such as politics, military affairs, science and technology, or any sensitive issues that are not suitable for public publication, and the manuscript shall not involve any language or experiment that harms animals and human beings or violates human morals and ethics. The author shall ensure that the attribution and ranking of all authors/units are correct and undisputed.

The authorship qualification must meet one of the following conditions:

a. Make substantial contributions to the design conception, experimental research, data collection and result analysis of the research work;

b. Writing articles or making key revisions to important academic content;

c. Comprehensively review and check the final published articles, and finally review and finalize the draft;

d. Agree to take responsibility for all aspects of the research to ensure that issues relating to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the paper are properly investigated and resolved.

Those who do not meet any of the criteria should not be listed as authors, but can be thanked in the “acknowledgements”. When the author is a group author, all group members shall meet the above criteria and shall be responsible for the quality, accuracy and ethics of the papers. All authors shall participate in determining the order of authors.

(3) Reviewer responsibilities

In the process of peer review, the reviewers shall abide by the following code of ethics.

a. When receiving the review invitation, the reviewers should first understand the positioning and review requirements of the Journal. Look at how your expertise and research interests match the papers you are reviewing. If there is no match or the review cannot be completed within the prescribed time, the editorial department should be informed in time and the review experts should be suggested to be replaced.

b. Review experts should adhere to the principle of objectivity, fairness and prudence, and only evaluate the academic nature of the reviewed papers, without making personal comments or personal attacks. The selection of the paper is not affected by the contributor’s race, gender, religion, belief, status, qualifications and authority, and should be clearly stated with sufficient evidence and facts.

c. The reviewer should have no interest relationship with the author and sponsor of the paper, and avoid the review of the paper with conflict of interest. The main conflicts of interest are as follows: The reviewer has had a recent scientific collaboration with the author, the reviewer works in the same unit as the author, there is a direct competition between the reviewer and the author, there is a personal conflict or close personal relationship between the reviewer and the author, and the reviewer has a financial interest related to the paper.

d. The reviewers shall keep confidential the content, author information and relevant contents of the reviewed papers, and shall not use and share the content of the reviewed papers for purposes unrelated to the review procedure without authorization.

e. The review experts should timely put forward suggestions on rejection, repair and rereview, and put forward detailed suggestions on the problems existing in the paper, so as to help the authors accurately understand their research work and help the editorial department make a correct judgment on the quality of the paper.

f. Without the permission of the editorial department, the reviewers shall not transfer the papers to others (colleagues, students, etc.) for review.

g. The reviewer should check whether there is any academic misconduct such as repeated publication, plagiarism, tampering and forgery in the review process. If any of these behaviors are suspected, the editorial office should be informed promptly and relevant evidence should be provided.

h. After submitting the review comments, the reviewers should contact the editor/editorial board in time if they obtain relevant information to influence the initial feedback or suggestion. After publication, the editorial office should be informed of any problems or potential conflicts of interest that have not been discovered during the review process.

2  Identification and treatment of academic misconduct

The definition of academic misconduct in Acta Petrologica et Mineralogica is based on the latest national standard “Academic Publishing Specification—Definition of Academic Misconduct for Journals (CY/T174-2019)”, which includes plagiarism, forgery, tampering, improper attribution, multiple submission of one manuscript, repeated publication, violation of research ethics, etc.

(1) In the preliminary review of the submitted paper, it will be detected the academic misconduct by using various retrieval channels such as the AMLC. The repetition ratio of the text should not exceed 15%. The Journal will cooperate with peer academic journals to prevent the publication of the academic misconduct papers.

(2) In the whole process from review to publication, once academic misconduct is found, the author shall immediately reject the manuscript and notify the relevant departments.

(3) After the publication of the paper, the Journal still has the obligation and responsibility to regularly and randomly detect and supervise the academic misconduct of the published articles. Once the academic misconduct is found, the Journal will make efforts to assist the relevant institutions to investigate, and take measures such as retraction, notification of the relevant institutions and publication of retraction statement for the relevant articles with sufficient evidence.

3  Complaints and appeals

The Journal allows authors to lodge complaints and appeals, and will timely check and deal with them according to relevant information and evidence provided by authors.

4 Correction and retraction

For published papers, especially those that conflict with the interpretation of some data or content, regardless of the cause of the error, the article will be updated on the Journal’s website and database platform once the error is discovered.

For published papers, if it is found that there are legal infringements, defamation and other legal restrictions, or if it has been proved that there has been academic misconduct, the Journal will promptly withdraw the paper and issue a notice.

5 Copyright and transfer

After acceptance of the paper, the author shall sign a “Paper Licensing Agreement” with the Journal, and transfer the exclusive right to use the copyright of the paper to Acta Petrologica et Mineralogica. The Journal has the right to allow third parties to share the paper data, and may also be used for other academic purposes.