1. Editorial Policy

1.1. Confidentiality
All the submitted manuscripts and associated materials are considered confidential and should be treated as such by all parties involved in the review process. Editors and reviewers are responsible for not disclosing, discussing, or using any information from the manuscript before it is published.

1.2. Conflict of Interest (CoI)
To maintain transparency, credibility, and ethical standards in scholarly publishing the Conflict of Interest (CoI) is a vital element for a peer-reviewed journal. As per the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, “Authors should avoid entering into agreements with study sponsors, both for-profit and non-profit, that interfere with authors’ access to all of the study’s data or that interfere with their ability to analyze and interpret the data and to prepare and publish manuscripts independently when and where they choose.”
1.2.1. CoI for authors:
The author(s) must declare that there is no conflict of interest in the submitted manuscript that will influence the work to be biased. The most common CoI may be employment, ownership, financial interests, grant or funding, patent licensing, membership, consultancies, affiliation, professional relationship, etc.
1.2.2. CoI for reviewers:
The journal invites peer-reviewers to exclude themselves in cases where there is a significant conflict of interest, financial or otherwise.
1.2.3. CoI for Editorials:
The journal’s editorial team members are required to declare any interests that might influence or be perceived to influence, their editorial activities.

2. Authorship Criteria

To be an author of an article, individuals typically need to meet certain criteria, and these criteria can vary somewhat depending on the specific field, journal, or academic institution. However, some common criteria for authorship include:
2.1. Substantial Contribution:
Authors are expected to make a significant intellectual or practical contribution to the research. This could include designing the study, collecting and analyzing data, interpreting results, or drafting and revising the manuscript.
2.2. Drafting and Revising the Article:
Authors are often involved in the writing process, including drafting and revising the manuscript. This includes contributing to the intellectual content, ensuring accuracy, and approving the final version of the manuscript.
2.3. Final Version Approval:
All authors should give their approval for the final version of the manuscript to be published. This indicates that they agree with the content and findings presented on it.
2.4. Accountability:
Authors are expected to take responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the research. This includes being able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific aspects of the work.
2.5. Funding Sources:
Authors should disclose and acknowledge any material or financial support received for the research. This includes equipment, grants, or other resources that contributed to the study.
2.6. Declaration of Conflicts of Interest (CoI):
Authors should disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence the interpretation of the research findings. This might include personal relationships, financial interests, or other connections that could be perceived as a conflict.
2.7. Data Access and Integrity:
Authors should be prepared to provide access to the raw data, if necessary, and ensure the integrity of the data. This helps to assure the accuracy and replicability of the study.
2.8. Review and Approval of Submission:
All authors should be involved in the process of submitting the manuscript for publication in this journal. This involves reviewing the manuscript, agreeing to its submission, and handling any revisions or responses to reviewers.
2.9. Author Type Limit:
There is no author limit, but it is recommended to mention less than 10 authors, and up to two (2) authors can be corresponding authors.
2.10. Name Change Policy:
Authors can request to change their name before publishing. If they want to change the name from the published article then they should follow the Correction & Retraction Policy. The DOI will remain unchanged and the updated metadata will be transmitted to our indexing partner(s) with the intent that future citations will be associated with the correct name.
2.11. Author’s Designation:
The Author should provide the full affiliation name with the institution address. They can provide up to two (2) different designations/affiliations for an author.

3. Reviewer Suggestions

It is highly recommended to suggest a minimum of three(3) reviewers who have expertise in the particular area to review the manuscript. Please provide Full name, Address, Affiliation, Email of the reviewer. The reviewer should not be a co-author of the submitted manuscript or from the same institution. Proposed reviewers can be from among the authors that you often cite in your article.

4. Publication Ethics

4.1. Ethical Statement Stecab Publishing is committed to meeting and upholding standards of ethical behavior at all stages of publication ethics. To ensure the quality of the research with the rigorous peer-review policy, some obstacles like plagiarism, data duplication, data fabrication, data falsification, misleading information, and image manipulation occur. The following ethical standards are strictly followed by the journal to prevent these issues.
4.1.1. The author should read carefully the Author’s Guidelines before submitting their article.
4.1.2. It is required to declare that there is no conflict of interest in this research during the submission.
4.1.3. The research article should be prepared by following the Manuscript Template for a better representation of the article.
4.1.4. The author should not include any content that is already published. If any figure, or information is used, please include the citation and make sure that it has necessary permission and is licensed under CC-BY 4.0.
4.1.5. If an unusual image, misleading data, or misinterpreting information manipulation is found and identified during the peer-review process, the journal may decline the article.
4.1.6. If an unusual image (improper cropped image, low-resolution image, lack of information, copied image that missed data, etc.), misleading data, or misinterpreting information manipulation is found and identified after publishing the article, the journal may correct or retract the article from the website.
4.1.7. The article must not be submitted anywhere else before or after the submission.
4.1.8. The manuscript should describe clearly the methodology for further use by other researchers as well as the findings of the research.
4.1.9. The author should prepare the raw data of the research to share with the editorial body.
4.1.10. The journal only accepts research that is written in English.
4.1.11. Those researches are encouraged that are already published in another language.
4.1.12. The author should be responsive to communicate with the editorial office for any assistance regarding the publication.
4.1.13. After reviewing the manuscript the revised version must be submitted by a week (maximum).
4.1.14. To avoid correction or manipulation after publication, the journal publishes the copyedited article once the author confirms it. After all, if any inaccurate information is found after publication then please provide the necessary and sufficient information to the respective journal’s email.
4.1.15. An editorial team member can publish their works but they can not interfere in reviewing and making decisions on the article.
If any allegation of misconduct is found to the editor of the journal, they will contact the corresponding author, and/or other contributor with necessary and sufficient evidence. All the authors of Stecab Publishing are encouraged to read carefully the code of ethics and comply with the best ethical standards.
4.2. Editorial Process and Peer-Review
4.2.1. Preliminary Review
After submitting an article, the editor of the journal preliminary reviews the whole article and checks the manuscript whether it is maintained to the ethical standard, whether it is developed according to the manuscript template, the article is suitable for the particular journal. The assigned editor can make a decision on the article, accept for review, request for revision before undergoing the review process, or decline the submission.
4.2.2. Once the article is developed according to the journal's guidelines, follows the manuscript template, and is aligned with the area of publication then it is sent to check the similarity index (Turnitin). The journal accepts a maximum of 25% similarity with references. If the article does not follow one of the previous conditions, the editor sends it to the author to make the necessary changes according to the editor's comments.
4.2.3. If the article passes the above steps, the paper is sent for review evaluation process. The editorial team members select at least two (2) reviewers aligned with the expertise of reviewers and the article's topic. One or more reviewers may be external, from the editorial team members, or from the author's recommended reviewers according to Section 3.
4.2.4. There are several guidelines for the reviewers so that they can have a clear concept of the journal. Once they submit their feedback, the editorial team makes a decision on the article. The reviewer can suggest acceptance, rejection, or acceptance after some minor changes.
4.2.5. Peer-Review
After successfully passing the preliminary review process, it will be assigned a minimum of two experts on the particular research area for the double-blinded peer review.
4.2.5.1. Reviewer Selection Process
Reviewers are selected for each article based on their expertise in the subject matter of the submitted manuscript. The editorial team carefully chooses two or more most qualified reviewers who have relevant knowledge and experience in the specific area of the submitted article. One of the chosen reviewers would be from the editorial team and the other reviewer can be selected from external sources e.g. author's recommendation.
4.2.5.2. Reviewer Confidentiality
All the reviewers are expected to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscripts they review. They are responsible for not disclosing any information about the manuscript or its content to others before publishing the article.
4.2.5.3. Reviewer's Recommendations
It is requested that the assigned reviewers provide descriptive feedback and objective comments on the manuscript's fairness, weaknesses, and scopes for improvement of the article. Based on the reviewer's evaluation, they make one of the following recommendations to the editorial team:

• Accept Submission: This recommendation means the manuscript meets the journal's criteria and scopes and can be accepted for publication without major corrections.
• Accept after Minor Revision: This suggestion states that the manuscript requires minor correction before publishing to address specific concerns raised by the reviewers
• Major Revision Required: This decision maybe recommended when an article does not align with the journal criteria but can be improved by correcting a significant part of the article.
• Decline Submission: This decision describes that the article does not comply with the journal policy and is not recommended to publish.

4.2.6. The final decision on the submission by the editorial team is based on the reviewers' recommendations and the assessment of the editorial team. The decision is communicated to the authors along with the reviewers' comments to help them understand the rationale behind the verdict.
4.2.7. The authors have the right to appeal a decision if they believe there was an error in the review process. Appeals should be submitted to the editor of the journal, and they will be carefully considered by the editorial team.
The journal maintains the highest standards of double-blind and peer-review to uphold the integrity of the scientific literature and promote advancements in propulsion technology. The journal always appreciates the invaluable contributions of our reviewers, whose expertise and efforts play a vital role in ensuring the quality and impact of the research to the global research community.
4.2.8. After receiving the feedback from the reviewers the editorial team will decide about the next process. If the article is satisfied by the editorial team, then it will be accepted for publication and the article will be sent to start the copyediting process.
4.2.9. If there are any changes, a subject editor may be assigned to follow up the necessary corrections have been made or not. This process will be continued until the satisfaction of the editorial team. If the revision has some major changes, a new round of review maybe initiated.
4.2.10. Once the manuscript is prepared for publication, a draft copy of the article is usually sent to the corresponding author to check the final copy whether it is alright or not. If there are any corrections the copyediting editor will take the necessary action with the team.The journal follows this process strictly because it is not recommended to make any minor changes after an article is published.
4.2.11. If the author permits to ahead of publication, the production team prepares the metadata of the article to become available of the article online. The editorial assistant also will send the publication certificate, and disseminate the article to social media and other archiving databases.

To learn more about the peer-review process, please Click Here

5. Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC)

Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC) refers to scientific research that, while intended for beneficial purposes, could potentially be misapplied for harmful purposes. The concept of DURC has gained attention in the context of life sciences and biotechnology, where research findings and technologies could have both positive and negative implications, including potential harm to public health or the environment.
According to the definition introduced by COPE, the researcher should be clearly indicated in the manuscript, and potential dual-use research of concern should be explained in the cover letter during the submission. It is the responsibility of the author to comply with relevant national and international laws.

6. Plagiarism and Fabrication

All the articles published at Stecab Publishing, evaluate submissions on the understanding that they are the original work of the author(s). Re-use of text, data, figures, or images without appropriate acknowledgment or permission is considered plagiarism, as is the paraphrasing of text, concepts, and ideas. The journal uses Turnitin to check the similarity index to avoid plagiarism.

7. Redundant/Duplicate Publication

A duplicate or redundant publication is a publication that overlaps substantially with one already published, in the press, or in an electronic media submission. Duplicate or redundant submission is the same manuscript (or the same data) that is submitted to different journals at the same time. International copyright laws, ethical conduct, and cost-effective use of resources require that readers can be assured that what they are reading is original.
Submitted manuscripts should not have been published or currently submitted elsewhere. Duplicate publication is a violation of the APA code of ethics (APA Publication Manual, 2010) and will be grounds for prompt rejection of the submitted manuscript. If the editor is not aware of the violation and the article has been published, a notice of duplicate submission and the ethical violation will be published.

8. Copyright and Licensing

All the articles published by Stecab Publishing are copyrighted by the authors. The articles are open-access and will be distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0). Anyone is allowed to copy, distribute, and transmit the article on the condition that the original article is free and should be properly cited.

9. Discussion, Correction, Retraction, and Withdrawal Policy

The editor of the journal is always open to discuss on any issue occurs after publishing any article via email. If any unusual image manipulation, misleading data, allegations of misconduct, misinterpreting information, conflict of interest, or bogus claims of authorship are found and identified after publishing the article, the journal authority may correct or retract the article from the website. The retracted or withdrawn article's title, author's list, publication date, volume, issue, and keywords, will be available on the website and in place of the abstract The article is unpublished due to violation of publication ethics will be shown.

10. Human Subject Research

When the research will be related to human data, human subjects, human materials, it is mandatory to ensure the investigations were carried out under the declaration of Helsinki rules. As per the rule, an approval from the appropriate ethical committee must be undertaken before the research study. The approval should be an international standard and should mention the research reference number, name of the approved committee, and date of the approval. If the information is non-interventional, the participants must be well informed about the study, their confidentiality, and the reason behind the research associated.
The author should mention the appropriate cause if approval is not required, the author should provide the local legal clause that mentions that ethical approval is not required.

11. Use of Animals in Research

Ethical guidelines for the use of animals in research are crucial to ensure the humane treatment of animals and the scientific validity of the research. Research involving animals should have approval from an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) or an equivalent ethics committee. It is recommended to reduce the number of animals used, refine experimental techniques to minimize harm and distress and replace animals with alternative methods whenever possible. The researcher should provide appropriate housing conditions, including sufficient space, environmental enrichment, and proper nutrition. Reports of the use of animals in research, including methods, results, and ethical considerations, in scientific publications should be presented transparently according to ARRIVE guidelines.
Authors should be aware of and comply with the applicable laws and regulations governing the use of animals in research in their specific context.

12. Refund Policy

The Article Processing Charges (APC) are required for processing a manuscript from submission to publication once an article is accepted by the editorial team. The journal will not issue refunds of any kind after the manuscript is accepted and the APC is paid.

13. Open Access Policy

All the original research articles published by Stecab Publishing are open-access and freely accessible online immediately after publication. Readers and visitors are free to access and distribute the contribution under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY). Authors can benefit from the open-access publication model from the below aspects:

• High high visibility, free and unlimited accessibility of the publication.
• This policy enables faster dissemination of a research.
• It also accelerate the scientific discovery to the research community.
• Open-access publications are more frequently cited by global researchers.