On This Page
TK TechForum Journal, formerly known as ThyssenKrupp Techforum, is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics, research integrity, editorial independence, and scholarly responsibility. The journal regards publication ethics as an essential component of reliable academic communication and as a necessary condition for protecting the credibility of the scientific and technical record.
The ethical policies of the journal are informed by recognized international best-practice guidance for scholarly journals, including the principles promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All parties involved in the publication process, including authors, reviewers, editors, editorial staff, and the publisher, are expected to act with honesty, transparency, fairness, accountability, and professional care.
Publishing in TK TechForum Journal represents a contribution to the permanent scholarly record. The journal therefore applies consistent editorial and ethical procedures to protect research quality, support fair peer review, prevent misconduct, correct the literature when necessary, and ensure that readers, authors, and indexing bodies can rely on the integrity of the published content.
1. Core Ethical Principles
The journal applies the following principles across all editorial decisions, peer-review activities, production processes, and post-publication actions:
- integrity and honesty in the reporting of research;
- originality of scholarly work and appropriate attribution of sources;
- transparency in research methods, data sources, funding, and competing interests;
- fair, unbiased, and independent editorial handling;
- confidentiality of submissions, peer-review reports, and editorial correspondence;
- respect for authorship, contributorship, and intellectual ownership;
- responsible correction of the scholarly record when errors, omissions, or misconduct are identified;
- professional communication among authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher.
These principles guide the journal’s approach to manuscript assessment, reviewer selection, conflict-of-interest management, correction notices, retractions, appeals, and all other matters related to publication ethics.
2. Responsibilities of Authors
Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submissions are accurate, original, ethically prepared, and suitable for scholarly review. By submitting a manuscript to TK TechForum Journal, authors confirm that the work complies with the journal’s ethical standards and that all authors have agreed to the submission.
2.1 Reporting Standards
Authors must present a clear, accurate, and objective account of the research performed. Manuscripts should describe the research question, methodology, analysis, results, interpretation, and limitations in sufficient detail to allow readers and reviewers to understand, evaluate, and, where applicable, replicate or verify the work.
The manuscript should not contain knowingly false, misleading, fabricated, or exaggerated statements. Authors must not selectively report results in a manner that distorts the findings. The discussion and conclusions should be supported by the evidence presented in the manuscript and should not exceed what the data, analysis, or theoretical argument can reasonably justify.
2.2 Data Access, Availability, and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide supporting materials during editorial assessment or after publication. Such materials may include raw data, processed data, computer code, calculation sheets, laboratory records, model parameters, simulation settings, original figures, image files, survey instruments, or other documentation necessary to assess the reliability of the work.
Authors should retain underlying research materials for a reasonable period after publication and should be prepared to provide them if questions arise about the accuracy, reproducibility, or integrity of the published work. Where data or code cannot be shared because of confidentiality, privacy, security, contractual restrictions, legal obligations, or ethical limitations, authors must clearly state the reason and describe what materials can be shared, under what conditions, and through what access procedure.
2.3 Originality and Plagiarism
Manuscripts submitted to TK TechForum Journal must be original and must not contain plagiarized material. Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable. This includes verbatim copying without quotation and citation, close paraphrasing without attribution, appropriation of ideas or methods, reuse of figures or tables without permission or citation, and presenting another person’s data, results, or interpretation as one’s own.
Authors must also avoid misleading reuse of their own previously published work. Undisclosed text recycling, duplicate use of previously published data, or self-plagiarism may misrepresent the novelty of the submission and is therefore not acceptable unless it is clearly disclosed, properly cited, and justified by the nature of the work.
All reused content, including figures, tables, datasets, images, technical diagrams, and substantial text excerpts, must be appropriately cited and used with permission where required.
2.4 Duplicate, Redundant, or Concurrent Submission
Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. Concurrent submission is considered a serious breach of publication ethics. Duplicate or redundant publication is also unacceptable when it misleads readers, editors, or indexing services about the originality of the work.
If related versions of the manuscript exist, such as a preprint, conference paper, institutional report, technical report, thesis chapter, or earlier partial publication, authors must disclose this information at the time of submission. The authors should clearly explain how the submitted manuscript differs from the earlier version and what new contribution it makes.
2.5 Authorship and Contributorship
Authorship must accurately reflect substantial intellectual contribution to the work. Appropriate contributions may include conception and design of the study, development of methodology, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of results, drafting of the manuscript, critical revision for important intellectual content, and approval of the final version.
The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all listed authors have approved the final manuscript, agreed to its submission, and accepted responsibility for their contributions. Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged appropriately, provided that permission has been obtained.
Authorship changes after submission, including the addition, removal, or reordering of authors, require editorial approval and written confirmation from all authors. The journal may request an explanation for the change and may decline authorship changes that are not properly justified.
2.6 Acknowledgement of Sources and Permissions
Authors must acknowledge all sources that influenced the research, analysis, or interpretation of the work. Proper citation is required for published literature, datasets, technical standards, software tools, methods, images, and other intellectual materials used in the manuscript.
If third-party copyrighted material is included, such as figures, photographs, maps, diagrams, tables, or extensive excerpts, authors are responsible for obtaining permission where required. Appropriate credit lines must be included in the manuscript. Failure to obtain necessary permissions may delay publication or require removal or replacement of the material.
2.7 Conflicts of Interest and Funding Disclosure
Authors must disclose any financial or non-financial competing interests that could reasonably be perceived to influence the research or its interpretation. Such interests may include employment, consultancy, advisory roles, stock ownership, patents, grants, honoraria, paid expert testimony, personal relationships, academic competition, institutional affiliations, or other relevant circumstances.
All sources of funding must be clearly stated. If a sponsor or funder had a role in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, writing, or the decision to submit for publication, that role must be disclosed. If the funder had no role, this should also be stated where appropriate.
2.8 Hazards, Safety, and Ethical Compliance
If the research involves unusual hazards, including dangerous chemicals, high voltage equipment, biological agents, toxic materials, hazardous machinery, or other risk-bearing procedures, authors must describe relevant risks and safety precautions.
If the research involves human participants, identifiable personal data, animals, fieldwork permissions, environmental sampling, or institutional approvals, authors must comply with applicable laws, institutional requirements, and ethical standards. Manuscripts should report relevant approval numbers, consent procedures, and safeguards. If formal approval was not required, authors must explain why and describe the ethical protections applied.
2.9 Image, Figure, and Results Integrity
Figures, images, plots, and visual materials must not be manipulated in a way that misleads readers or changes the interpretation of the results. Necessary processing, such as contrast adjustment, brightness correction, filtering, cropping, or image assembly, should be applied consistently and transparently. When image processing affects interpretation, it should be described in the manuscript.
Fabrication, falsification, selective modification, or improper manipulation of images, data, results, or analytical outputs constitutes serious misconduct. The journal may request original image files, raw data, or supporting documentation where concerns arise.
2.10 Corrections after Publication
Authors have a continuing responsibility for the accuracy of their published work. If authors discover a material error, omission, or inaccuracy after publication, they must promptly inform the editorial office and cooperate with the journal in issuing a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other appropriate notice.
3. Plagiarism Policy
TK TechForum Journal treats plagiarism as a serious violation of scholarly ethics. The journal expects authors to submit original work and to provide accurate attribution for all sources and reused materials.
3.1 Forms of Plagiarism
Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:
- copying text, figures, tables, diagrams, data, or ideas from another source without proper citation;
- closely paraphrasing another work without attribution;
- presenting another person’s results, methods, or interpretations as one’s own;
- translating a work from another language and presenting it as original without citation;
- using previously published material by the same authors without disclosure when such reuse misleads readers about originality;
- reusing figures, tables, or datasets without permission where permission is required.
3.2 Similarity Screening
Submissions may be screened using similarity-checking tools and editorial review. Similarity reports are interpreted by editors in context. Not all textual overlap is unethical. Legitimate overlap may occur in references, standard methodological descriptions, technical terminology, commonly used phrases, institutional names, legal statements, or properly quoted material.
Editors evaluate similarity by considering the amount of overlap, the location of overlap, the nature of the copied material, whether proper attribution is provided, and whether the overlap affects the originality of the manuscript.
3.3 Handling Suspected Plagiarism
If potentially inappropriate overlap is identified before publication, the journal may request clarification, require revision with proper quotation and citation, reject the manuscript, or take other editorial action depending on the severity of the case.
If plagiarism is confirmed after publication, the journal may publish a correction, expression of concern, or retraction. In serious cases, the journal may notify the authors’ institutions, funders, or other relevant bodies where appropriate.
3.4 Author Responsibility
Authors are responsible for checking the originality of their manuscripts before submission. They must ensure that all reused material is clearly identified, properly cited, and used with permission where required.
4. Responsibilities of Reviewers
Reviewers play an essential role in maintaining the quality, credibility, and integrity of the journal. Reviewers are expected to provide fair, timely, confidential, and constructive evaluations of manuscripts.
4.1 Confidentiality
Manuscripts submitted for review are confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, copy, distribute, cite, or discuss the manuscript with others without explicit permission from the editor. Reviewers must also protect the confidentiality of reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, and any supplementary materials provided during the review process.
4.2 Objectivity and Constructive Feedback
Reviews should be fair, evidence-based, professional, and focused on the scholarly content of the manuscript. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate. Reviewers should provide clear reasoning for their recommendations and offer constructive suggestions that can help authors improve the manuscript.
A useful review should identify strengths, weaknesses, methodological concerns, interpretive issues, missing literature, clarity problems, and the significance of the contribution. Reviewers should distinguish between essential revisions and optional suggestions.
4.3 Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must declare any conflict of interest that may compromise, or appear to compromise, their impartiality. Conflicts may include recent collaboration with the authors, direct academic competition, close personal relationships, financial interests, institutional connections, or involvement in related work.
If a reviewer believes that they cannot provide an independent and unbiased assessment, they should decline the review invitation or consult the editor before proceeding.
4.4 Timeliness
Reviewers should accept review invitations only when they have the expertise and availability to complete the review within the requested timeframe. If delays occur, reviewers should inform the editor promptly so that the editorial process can be managed efficiently.
4.5 Integrity Checks
Reviewers should alert editors to suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or falsified data, inappropriate image manipulation, undisclosed conflicts of interest, unethical research practices, or major methodological flaws. Reviewers may also suggest relevant missing citations, but citation suggestions should be academically justified and not used for personal citation advantage.
5. Responsibilities of Editors
Editors are responsible for protecting the independence, fairness, confidentiality, and integrity of the editorial process. Editorial decisions should be based on scholarly merit and should be made without discrimination or inappropriate influence.
5.1 Editorial Independence and Fair Decision-Making
Editors evaluate manuscripts according to relevance, originality, methodological rigor, technical accuracy, clarity, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field. Decisions must not be influenced by commercial interests, institutional pressure, personal relationships, political considerations, or other inappropriate factors.
Editors should provide authors with clear decisions and, where appropriate, constructive feedback based on reviewer reports and editorial assessment.
5.2 Confidentiality
Editors and editorial staff must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, reviewer identities where applicable, reviewer reports, editorial discussions, and correspondence. Information obtained through the editorial process must not be used for personal advantage or shared outside the review process except where required for ethical investigation or editorial management.
5.3 Conflicts of Interest
Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists. Such manuscripts should be reassigned to an independent editor. Conflicts may include authorship relationships, recent collaboration, institutional affiliation, financial interest, personal relationship, or direct academic competition.
5.4 Management of Peer Review
Editors are responsible for selecting qualified and independent reviewers, monitoring review timelines, assessing reviewer comments, and ensuring that reviews are relevant, constructive, and ethically appropriate. Editors may seek additional reviews where reports are insufficient, contradictory, or outside the scope of the manuscript.
5.5 Responding to Ethical Concerns
Editors must act promptly and fairly when ethical concerns are raised. Actions may include requesting clarification from authors, consulting reviewers or editorial board members, seeking external expert opinion, contacting institutions where appropriate, and issuing corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern when necessary.
The primary aim of editorial action is to protect the integrity of the scholarly record while ensuring procedural fairness to all parties involved.
6. Misconduct, Complaints, and Appeals
The journal takes allegations of misconduct seriously and handles them through a fair, evidence-based, and confidential process.
6.1 Definition of Misconduct
Examples of misconduct include plagiarism, duplicate submission, redundant publication, fabrication or falsification of data, image manipulation, unethical research practices, undisclosed conflicts of interest, authorship manipulation, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, misuse of confidential material, and failure to disclose relevant permissions or approvals.
6.2 Handling Ethical Concerns
When concerns arise, the journal typically conducts an initial assessment to determine the nature and seriousness of the issue. The editorial office may contact authors for explanation and supporting evidence, consult reviewers or editors, request original data or documentation, and seek external expert advice where necessary.
Possible outcomes may include no further action, a request for clarification, manuscript revision, rejection, publication of a correction, publication of an expression of concern, retraction, notification of relevant institutions or funders, or restrictions on future submissions in serious or repeated cases.
6.3 Complaints
Complaints about editorial process, reviewer conduct, publication ethics, corrections, or journal procedures should be submitted to the editorial office with clear evidence and relevant documentation. The journal will review complaints carefully and respond in a professional manner.
6.4 Appeals
Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a reasoned, evidence-based appeal to the editorial office. Appeals should explain why the authors believe the decision was incorrect and should address the substantive comments made by reviewers and editors. Appeals are reviewed fairly, but the submission of an appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision.
7. Post-Publication Updates: Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern
The journal is committed to preserving the accuracy and reliability of the scholarly record. When significant errors or ethical concerns are identified after publication, the journal may issue one of the following notices.
Corrections, including errata or corrigenda, may be published when errors materially affect the understanding, interpretation, citation, or reliability of the article but do not invalidate the main findings.
Expressions of concern may be published when serious concerns have been raised but the investigation is ongoing, inconclusive, or delayed. An expression of concern alerts readers while preserving procedural fairness.
Retractions may be issued when findings cannot be relied upon because of major error, fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, unethical research, duplicate publication, or other serious breaches of publication ethics.
Retracted articles remain accessible for the purpose of maintaining the scholarly record, but they are clearly marked as retracted. Retraction notices explain the reason for the retraction whenever possible.
8. Generative Artificial Intelligence Policy
TK TechForum Journal recognizes that generative artificial intelligence tools may assist certain aspects of scholarly writing, editing, coding, data handling, or administrative workflow. However, such tools do not replace human responsibility, expert judgment, authorship accountability, editorial independence, or reviewer confidentiality.
8.1 General Principle
Authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, confidentiality, and integrity of all work submitted, reviewed, edited, or published. AI tools must not be used in a way that compromises research integrity, creates unverifiable claims, fabricates references, misrepresents authorship, or breaches confidentiality.
8.2 Use of AI by Authors
Authors may use AI tools for limited support, such as language improvement, grammar correction, outlining, coding assistance, translation support, or formatting help, provided that all outputs are carefully reviewed and verified by the authors.
Authors must ensure that AI-generated output does not introduce fabricated citations, false statements, inaccurate data, unverifiable claims, misleading interpretations, or unacknowledged borrowed content. AI tools must not be listed as authors because they cannot take responsibility for the work, approve the final manuscript, or respond to questions regarding integrity.
Disclosure is required when AI tools materially contribute to content creation, content transformation, analysis, code generation, image creation, tables, or substantial manuscript drafting. A disclosure should include the name of the tool, the purpose for which it was used, the parts of the manuscript affected, and confirmation that the authors reviewed and verified the output.
Suggested disclosure text:
“We used [tool name] to assist with [purpose]. All outputs were reviewed and verified by the authors, who take full responsibility for the content.”
8.3 AI-Generated Images and Visual Content
AI-generated images, figures, or visual materials must not be presented as real experimental, clinical, field, microscopic, photographic, or observational evidence. If AI-generated visuals are used for conceptual illustration, they must be clearly labeled as AI-generated, and the tool or method used to create them must be disclosed.
Authors are responsible for ensuring that AI-generated visual content does not infringe rights, mislead readers, or obscure the distinction between evidence and illustration.
8.4 Use of AI by Reviewers
Reviewers must not upload submitted manuscripts, figures, data, supplementary files, or substantial parts of manuscripts into AI tools or external platforms that could compromise confidentiality. Reviewers remain personally responsible for the content, accuracy, tone, and recommendation of their review.
AI tools must not be used as a substitute for expert review. If reviewers use any digital or automated assistance that does not compromise confidentiality, they must ensure that the final review reflects their own independent judgment.
8.5 Use of AI by Editors and Editorial Staff
Editors and editorial staff must not upload confidential manuscript content, reviewer reports, decision letters, author correspondence, or unpublished materials into external AI tools. If AI is used for limited administrative drafting, such as improving the language of a general decision template without including confidential manuscript content, the editor must fully review, approve, and take responsibility for the final text.
9. Contact for Ethical Questions and Concerns
Questions, allegations, complaints, appeals, or requests related to publication ethics should be directed to the editorial office.
Editorial Office: editor@techforumjournal.com
The journal will review all ethics-related communications carefully and will handle them in accordance with the principles of fairness, confidentiality, accountability, and protection of the scholarly record.