Submission Guidelines
Sections
Ethical Obligations of Editors
Ethical Obligations of Authors
● Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Ethical Obligations of Reviewers
Article Retraction & Withdrawal
Manuscript Submission
You can use this list to carry out a final check of your submission before you submit it to the journal for review. Please check the relevant section in this Guide for Authors for more details.
● Read the Aims and Scope to make sure your manuscript is suitable for this journal.
● The submission has neither been previously published, nor is it under consideration for publication anywhere else.
● The submission has been approved by all authors of the manuscript.
● Permission has been obtained for use of any or all copyrighted material from other sources (including the Internet).
● Manuscript has been spell checked and grammar checked.
● All references mentioned in the Reference List are cited in the text, and vice versa.
● Make sure to submit your manuscript in Microsoft Word. If it contains special characters, equations or any precise formatting that needs to be retained, please submit a PDF of your manuscript for reference, in addition to an editable word version. Figure files should also be uploaded as high-resolution TIF or EPS files for printing.
● Journal policies detailed in this guide have been reviewed.
Submission of a manuscript implies: that the work described has not been published before; that it is not under consideration for publication anywhere else; that its publication has been approved by all co-authors, if any, as well as by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – at the institute where the work has been carried out. The publisher will not be held legally responsible should there be any claims for compensation due to misappropriation of materials.
A cover letter must be prepared when submitting articles to assist the author convey the work's importance to the editors. You can either put it in the submission system or attach it as a separate file. Generally, a cover letter should contain following parts:
● the title of the article
● the name and contact information of the corresponding author
● the names and affiliations of other authors
● a brief introduction of the paper including its research significance
Additionally, you are also at liberty to suggest reviewers be included or request that certain individuals be excluded from peer review, clearly stating such exclusion rationale in the cover letter. In the interests of transparency, ethicality and avoidance of conflict of interest, we suggest that you refrain from soliciting reviewers those with whom you have close working relationship or have collaborated with on a previous published work. Please note that the cover letter will not be transmitted to peer reviewers.
● Submit online at: https://ojs.wiserpub.com/index.php/EPR/login. For new user, please register and submit the manuscript in accordance with the submission guide. This method allows authors to monitor the manuscript handling process via the Open Journal System. The editorial office will also contact you on any progress regarding the manuscript, using the registered email address.
● Submit by mail to editorial-epr@wiserpub.com. No registration is needed. Any response regarding the manuscript will be manually communicated to you through your mail.
Environmental Protection Research has no restrictions on the length of manuscripts, provided that the text is concise and comprehensive. Full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. Additional data and files can be uploaded as “supplementary files” during the manuscript submission process. The supplementary files will also be available to the referees as part of the peer-review process, and will be available to readers as part of the manuscript once the paper published online.
The main article types published by Environmental Protection Research are as follows:
Original research: The journal considers all original research manuscripts provided that the work reports scientifically sound experiments and provides a substantial amount of new information. It includes full Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion sections.
Reviews: These should have a well-defined structure that is easily followed by the reader. Beyond a mere synthesis of available knowledge and publications, Reviews should have the aim of outlining new frameworks of ideas or even actionable ideas. Systematic reviews should follow the PRISMA guidelines. Authors are recommended to complete the checklist and flow diagram and include them with their submission.
Letters: Provide a critically selected overview of recent progress in important research fields. It is not intended that these articles be comprehensive, but rather insightful, selective, critical, opinionated, and even visionary.
Perspective: It is a scholarly opinion piece about current or future directions in a field. A Perspective can serve to assess the science or engineering directly concerned with a particular topic or report on relevant issues that may arise from the discipline (for example, policy, effects on society, regulatory issues and controversies). Perspectives that address interdisciplinary research areas or experimental results with significance to a broader audience are of particular interest.
Short Communications: The aim of publishing a Short Communication article is to present useful and novel preliminary results of interest to a wide, interdisciplinary audience. The manuscript should contain an abstract; a brief introduction; details of experimental procedures in sufficient detail to allow replication of the experiment; results; either tabular or graphical; conclusions; references.
Universal Wiser believes that journals publishing for communities with established pre-print servers should allow authors to submit manuscripts which have already been made available on a non-commercial preprint server. Allowing submission does not, of course, guarantee that an article will be sent out for review. It simply reflects our belief that journals should not rule out reviewing a paper simply because it has already been available on a non-commercial server.
This journal will consider for review articles previously available as preprints on non-commercial servers such as ArXiv, bioRxiv, psyArXiv, SocArXiv, engrXiv, etc. Authors may also post the submitted version of a manuscript to non-commercial servers at any time. Authors are requested to update any pre-publication versions with a link to the final published article.
Papers are only accepted as written in English. If your first language is not English, please make sure your paper can be understood by journal audiences. You can seek assistant tools or assistance from a native writer to check the manuscript.
Both English and American spelling are permitted in the journal, but please use only one consistently within the article. Non-discriminatory languages has to be used throughout the manuscript.
Semi-yearly
Format Instruction
Since manuscripts formatting can be time-consuming, we aspire to simplify the manuscript submission process by practising a format-free submission policy initially. Universal Wiser differentiates between the requirements for new and revised submissions. You can submit your manuscript in original format that will be used in the refereeing process. Only when your paper is at the revision stage, will you be requested to follow our formatting requirements for acceptance and subsequent publication.
Steps to follow for submitting your manuscripts with free format submission include the following:
Step 1: Ensure the manuscript is prepared as a single file, including texts, figures, and tables.
Step 2: Confirm all required sections are included in the manuscript.
(i.e. Abstract, Keywords, Introduction, Materials & Methods, Results, Conclusions, Figures/Tables with captions, Acknowledgements, Conflict of interest statement)
Step 3: Verify all cited referencing format is consistent throughout the manuscript. The references may be submitted in any style or format.
(Author(s) name(s), journal title/book title, article title, year of publication, volume & issue /book chapter, and the pagination. Including the DOI and/or URLs is highly encouraged.)
If you are asked to revise your manuscript after editorial or peer review, the journal will request the revised manuscript to be formatted according to our specification guidelines.
Format requirements for revised manuscript:
Contributions are required of a concise, focused account of the findings and reliable essential data. They should be well organized, written clearly and simply, avoiding exhaustive tables and figures. Authors are advised to use internationally agreed nomenclature, express all measurements in SI units, and acknowledge all the relevant sources.
Title: Titles must be limited to 20 words, and should be concise, indexable, and informative for a broad scientific audience. Authors should avoid using colons, questions, nonstandard abbreviations, etc. in titles.
Author(s): Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed substantially to the work. The order of the authors listed should be agreed upon by all the coauthors, and every author should assume ownership for the published content. Given names are written, followed by family names. The email addresses of all the authors are required.
Author affiliation: Affiliation should be the institution where the work was done. Complete addresses are required with postal codes, where such exist or is applicable.
Abstract: An abstract is a summary of the content of the manuscript. It should briefly describe the research purpose, method, result, any applicable recommendations for further research and conclusion in 300 words maximum. Please, avoid verbose terminologies or where unavoidable due to its expected audience or as part of a scientific nomenclature, provide additional clarification on the meaning of such terminology. Additionally, special signals, figures, tables, formulae and equations should be avoided, and citation of references is not allowed.
Keywords: A list of three to eight keywords should follow the abstract. The chosen keywords are required to reflect the theme of a manuscript and each keyword should be separated with a comma. Be sparing with abbreviations: only abbreviations firmly established in the field may be eligible. These keywords will be used for indexing purposes.
Text: A paper should begin with a brief introduction of the significance of the author's research. Nomenclature, signal and abbreviation should be defined at their initial appearance. All the figures and tables should be represented in numerical order.
Introduction: Being the most important part of the article, the introduction provides an executable roadmap to the inquiry. Generally, it begins with a thesis or problem statement, followed by an explication of the method utilized in the inquiry, including the length and scope of the investigation, where applicable. The next stages are the results, which illustrate what was gained by the inquiry, conclusions and recommendations for further inquiry. Subtitle is forbidden in this part, and the introduction of the article structure is considered unnecessary.
Figures and tables: Figures and tables should be numerically arranged, inserted in the text, and cited in order within the text. The figures should have resolution not lower than 600 dpi and clear lines of 5 px, with signals and letters in Times New Roman at 8 pt. A space should always be maintained between the variable and the unit.
Equations: An equation is numerically organized (Arabic numeral), and has the number put on its right side.
Abbreviations: Using abbreviations can be an effective way to avoid repeating lengthy, technical terms throughout a piece of writing. However, they should be used sparingly to prevent the text from becoming difficult to read and comprehend. To use an abbreviation, write out the term or phrase on first use, for comprehension of meaning and ease of reference, followed by the abbreviation in parentheses. Use brackets if introducing an abbreviation inside parentheses.
Acknowledgements: The author expresses his/her thanks to the people helping with this work, and acknowledges the valuable suggestions from the peer reviewers. Financial support, including grants also appear in this part, with grant number(s) following. The full title of each fund is required.
References: A comprehensive reference list is regarded as an important indicator of the paper's quality. If the relevant sources, especially the results published over a 2 or 3-year period are not reflected within the text, or most citations are from the author's publications, the editor reserves the right to consider this research not sufficiently scholarly to merit consideration for publication. The list of references should only include works that are cited in the text and that have been published or accepted for publication. Personal communications and unpublished works should only be mentioned in the text and excluded from the reference list. Do not use footnotes or endnotes as a substitute for a reference list.
Reference Format
In-Text Citation: It is not necessary to mention an author's name, pages used or date of publication in the in-text citation. All references should be numbered consecutively in order of appearance by using Arabic numerals in a square bracket, e.g.[1], that will then correspond to the full citation in the reference list.
Creating a Reference List: The Reference List appears at the end of paper and provides the full citations for all the references that have been used. List all references numerically in the order cited within the paper, and include the bracketed number at the beginning of each reference.
Journal article: print
[1] Errami M, Garner H. A tale of two citations. Nature. 2008; 451(7177): 397-399.
Author
Title of journal article
Title of journal (this should be in italics)
Year of publication
Volume number
(Issue number)
Page numbers of the article
Journal article: online/electronic
[2] Errami M, Garner H. A tale of two citations. Nature. 2008; 451(7177): 397–399. Available from: http:// www.nature.com/ nature/journal/v451/n7177/full/451397a.html [Accessed 20th January 2015].
[3] Wang F, Maidment G, Missenden J and Tozer R. The novel use of phase change materials in refrigeration plant. Part 1: Experimental investigation. Applied Thermal Engineering. 2007;27(17–18): 2893–2901. Available from: doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2005.06.011.
Author
Title of journal article
Title of journal (this should be in italics)
Year of publication
Volume number
(Issue number)
Page numbers of the article
Available from: URL (Include [Date of access]) or DOI (if available)
Book
[4] Simons NE, Menzies B, Matthews M. A Short Course in Soil and Rock Slope Engineering. London: Thomas Telford Publishing; 2001.
Author/Editor (if it is an editor always put (ed.) after the name)
Title (this should be in italics)
Series title and number (if part of a series)
Edition (if not the first edition)
Place of publication (if there is more than one place listed, use the first named)
Publisher
Year of publication
Book chapter
[5] Partridge H, Hallam G. Evidence-based practice and information literacy. In: Lipu S, Williamson K, Lloyd A. (eds.) Exploring methods in information literacy research. Wagga Wagga, Australia: Centre for Information Studies; 2007. p.149–170.
Author of the chapter
Title of chapter followed by, In:
Editor (always put (ed.) after the name)
Title of book (this should be in italics)
Series title and number (if part of a series)
Edition (if not the first edition)
Place of publication (if there is more than one place listed, use the first named)
Publisher
Year of publication
Page numbers (use 'p.' before single and multiple page numbers)
Conference proceeding: individual paper
[6] Wittke M. Design, construction, supervision and long-term behaviour of tunnels in swelling rock. In: Van Cotthem A, Charlier R, Thimus J-F, Tshibangu J-P. (eds.) Eurock 2006: multiphysics coupling and long term behaviour in rock mechanics: Proceedings of the International Symposium of the International Society for Rock Mechanics, EUROCK 2006, 9–12 May 2006, Liège, Belgium. London: Taylor & Francis; 2006. p.211–216.
Author
Title of conference paper followed by, In:
Editor/Organization (if it is an editor always put (ed.) after the name)
Title (this should be in italics)
Place of publication
Publisher
Year of publication
Page numbers (use 'p.' before single and multiple page numbers)
Author biography: Authors can add biographies to submissions. Biographies will be exhibited after the reference within 150 words including author's photo. The information of biographies should contain education backgrounds, current positions, research fields, awards and so on. It can be submitted within the cover letter or submission.
Article Processing Charge
Open access publishing is not without costs. Such costs are designed to cover the peer review process, copyediting, typesetting, publishing, content depositing and archiving processes. Those charges are applicable only to authors whose manuscripts have been successfully peer reviewed and accepted.
Environmental Protection Research will incur an Article Processing Charge of SGD 700 for the acceptance and publication of an article submitted and accepted on or after January 1st, 2025.
Universal Wiser will also institute a waiver or discount policy for the journal Environmental Protection Research if authors apply for with the following situations :
- ● Authors from low-income countries;
- ● The editorial board members and journal contributors;
- ● Authors from the institutes and organizations in collaboration with the journal;
- ● Participants of the conferences hold by the journal.
If authors are not included in the above-mentioned situations but want to request a waiver or discount, please email the editorial office with detailed information.
Editorial Process
Upon receiving a manuscript, the editorial office will perform an initial evaluation of the manuscript's suitability, including scientific validity for publication and especially, its potential for contributing to the body of knowledge in that particular discipline or ancillary ones. All manuscripts will be scrutinized critically by the editorial office before it is submitted for peer review. The peer review process will be conducted by independent experts in the discipline and the editorial office will collect at least two review reports per manuscript. The identities of both the authors and the reviewers are kept confidential, consistent with the principles that govern the double-blind peer review process. Where such is indicated, the authors may need to revise the manuscript based on the review report. The final decision on acceptance or otherwise of the paper is the prerogative of the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor(s). Accepted articles are then copy-edited for publication.
Key steps and details are as follow:
After submission, the manuscript will be assessed by the editor for the structure, style and compatibility of the manuscript according to the journal's manuscript preparation guidelines. Subsequently, the manuscript will be assessed for its originality and thoroughness, to determine whether it is a good fit for publication in the journal. Where lacking or inadequate in the aforementioned parameters, the manuscript may be rejected without any further reviews.
Universal Wiser practises the policy of double-blind peer review. Peer review is designed to assess the validity, quality, often the originality and contribution to the body of knowledge of such articles for publication. Its ultimate purpose is to maintain the integrity of scientific inquiry by filtering out invalid or poor quality articles.
The peer review process is conducted by reviewers who are professionals, therefore experts in the field related to the research. A suggestion of potential reviewers will be made by the academic editor during the initial manuscript evaluation. The author may recommend potential reviewers or provide the names of potential reviewers they wish to exclude from consideration in the peer review of their manuscript. The editorial team will respect these requests as long as they do not unduly interfere with the objective and thorough assessment of the submission.
The reviewers must hold a Ph.D. (exceptions are made in some fields, e.g. medicine), with no conflicts of interest, may not have published with the authors in the previous five years, or have recent publications in a field of similar or those related to the submitted manuscript. Reviewers will assess the technical soundness and validity of the methods, analysis and interpretation, all of which must be appropriate, properly and especially ethically conducted to support the data. The reviewers are given four weeks to prepare the review report. However, extensions can be granted on request that are not presumed to be frivolous or would unduly prolong the publication process in the case of potentially qualified, promising or interesting submissions. Through the peer review, at least two reports are collected for each manuscript—three if the advice from the first two reviewers differs substantially.
With the comprehensive consideration of the suitability of selected reviewers, the adequacy of reviewer comments and author response, overall scientific quality of the paper, the journal editor, Guest Editor or Editor-in-Chief will make a decision on the paper under three parameters: decline, acceptance or minor/major revision. For a declined/rejected paper, the editorial process ends with no further step to the next level in the process. An accepted paper, may proceed to the production stage, after the author complies with any recommendations to improve the manuscript format as required. Manuscripts requiring minor revision may proceed to the next level of revision and accompanying reviews, where applicable. Conversely, manuscripts requiring major revisions will entail for any such revisions be made privy to the original blinded peer reviewer, for further comments, since they may have become already conversant with its contents. The editors may alternatively elect a new round of peer reviews for any reason, including the unavailability of the previous reviewer(s).
Apart from in an exceptional or extenuating circumstances, we allow for a maximum of two rounds of major revision per manuscript. The author is expected to revise the paper according to the written recommendations from the reviewers and editor, including paper formatting as required. The author is required to submit the revised manuscript, highlighting the revised sections, as well as submit an itemized response letter to clarify what they did, including providing rationale for their action to accommodate the reviewers’ feedback regarding the manuscript.
The final decision on whether to accept the paper or otherwise is made by the Editor-in-Chief or associate editor(s). Accepted manuscripts are copy-edited, as well as edited for its English language and syntax. The acceptance criteria for all manuscripts are contingent on the quality and originality of the research, its significance to journal readership and especially contribution to the body of knowledge in the discipline. Except where otherwise stated, manuscripts are double-blind peer reviewed. Manuscripts will only be sent to production and subsequently for publication if the Editor-in-Chief determines that the paper meets the appropriate quality and relevance requirements.
After acceptance of a manuscript for publication and in preparation for publication on the journal's website, the in-house editorial staff will organize the production of the paper, which entails copyediting, layout editing, proofreading and final production. The journal is structured in yearly volumes and semi-yearly issues. Nevertheless, articles are published online immediately after acceptance and production.
Publication Ethics
It is an important role of the publisher to guarantee high-quality scientific publications, which enhance and promote public trust in scientific findings. Universal Wiser is highly appreciated and supports the great efforts made by journal editors and the often unsung volunteer work undertaken by peer reviewers, in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly community. Universal Wiser takes the responsibility to enforce a rigorous peer-review together with strict ethical policies and standards that ensure the publications of high quality scientific works. We promote the best practice in compliance with Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Note that this journal uses iThenticate's CrossCheck software to detect instances of overlapping and similar text in submitted manuscripts. Universal Wiser and our editors take publishing ethics issues very seriously, therefore averse to plagiarism, data falsification or inappropriate authorship credit.
1. Ethical Obligations of Editors
Ethically, an editor should give unbiased consideration to all manuscripts offered for publication, judging each on its merits and without regard to race, religion, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author(s). The sole responsibility for acceptance or rejection of a manuscript rests with the editor and Editor-in-Chief. Responsible and prudent exercise of this duty normally requires that the editor seek advice from reviewers, chosen for their expertise in the discipline, good judgment and as to the quality and veracity of manuscripts submitted for publication. However, manuscripts may be rejected without external review if considered by the editors to be inappropriate or unsuitable for the journal. Such rejections may be caused, but not limited to the failure of the manuscript to fit the scope of the journal, to pass similarity check, to be written in acceptable English, or other ethical reasons.
The editors or any staff from the editorial office is ethically prohibited from disclosing any information about a manuscript under consideration, to anyone other than those from whom professional advice is sought. If the editor handling the manuscript determines that it is unsuitable for publication in the journal for scientific reasons, they may then suggest and where acceptable by all concerned parties, arrange a transfer of the manuscript to an alternate Universal Wiser journal for further consideration with respect to reviews, as well as for the purpose of any applicable publication. Only after the author agrees to the transfer, can the editor's staff disclose to the alternate journal editor the titles, names of authors, text of the manuscript, supporting information, reviews of the originally submitted manuscript, and the identities of the reviewers.
Universal Wiser is committed to the highest ethical publishing standards, which ethos is not limited to deterring plagiarism, including self-plagiarism. Universal Wiser uses the Crossref Similarity Check powered by iThenticate to screen submitted manuscripts for similarity to published materials. Authors can also use iThenticate to screen their work before submission by visiting http://research.ithenticate.com. Authors should not engage in plagiarism – verbatim or near – verbatim copying, or very close paraphrasing, or text or results from another's work. Authors should not engage in self-plagiarism (also known as duplicate publication), unacceptably close replication of author's own previously published text or results without an acknowledgement of the source.
Authors should ensure that where material is taken from other sources (including their own published materials), the source is clearly cited and that where appropriate, permission is obtained.
Authors should not engage in excessive self-citation of their own work.
Authors should not copy references from other publications if they have not read the cited work.
Authors should not preferentially cite their own or their friends', peers', or institution's publications.
Authors should not cite advertisements or advertorial material.
In accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics - COPE guidelines, we expect that "original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations." This condition also applies to an author's own work. COPE has produced a discussion document on citation manipulation, with recommendations for best practice.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
At the point of submission, authors are encouraged to include a declaration of any conflicting interests. Each author should reveal any financial interests or connections, direct or indirect, or other situations that might raise the question of bias in the work reported or the conclusions, implications, or opinions stated or arrived at. The assumption of bias or conflict of interests may include but not limited to pertinent commercial or other sources of funding for the individual author(s) or for the associated department(s) or organization(s), personal relationships, or direct academic competition.
When submitting the revision, the corresponding author must provide the statement of conflict of interests on behalf of all authors of the manuscript. The statement should describe all potential sources of bias, including affiliations, funding sources, and financial or management relationships, that may constitute conflicts of interest. If no conflict of interest is declared, the following statement should be provided: "The authors declare no competing financial interest."
Prior to starting the study, If human subjects were used in the study, ethical approval must have been obtained for all protocols from local Institutional Review Board (IRB) or other appropriate ethics committee to confirm the study meets national and international guidelines for research on humans. Food Science and Engineering requires that authors provide a proof of research ethics or ethics statement along with the submission, which must provide details of the name of the ethics committee or organization and reference/permit numbers where available. In the case that ethics approval identifiers (i.e., reference numbers) are not available, written approval from the granting committee or organization must be provided as confidential supplementary file.
All research studies on humans (individuals, samples, or data) must have been performed in accordance with the principles stated in the Declaration of Helsinki or other relevant institutional and national guidelines and regulations, and that informed consent was obtained from all human subjects. For investigations undertaken on human subjects, the manner in which the informed consent was obtained from the study participants (i.e., oral or written) should be stated clearly as well.
The authors should inform the study participants of the purpose(s) of publication, the possible risks and benefits, and the right to withhold or withdraw consent. Consent should be obtained from the parent(s) or legal guardian(s) if the study participant is a minor.
Authors are obliged to declare and clearly specify any restrictions on the availability or the use of human data in the manuscript and must be prepared to provide further information to the journal editorial office upon request.
If the manuscript has more than one author, all authors should be properly credited. During manuscript submission, the submitting author must provide contact information (full names, email address, institutional affiliation, mailing address and if available, Open Research and Contributor Identification - ORCID of each author) for all of the coauthors. The author who submits the manuscript for publication accepts the responsibility of notifying all coauthors that the manuscript is being submitted. The author should also declare that any person named as coauthor of the manuscript is aware of the fact and has freely provided consent to being so named.
Authors are expected to consider carefully the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and provide the definitive list of authors at the time of the original submission. Any addition, deletion or rearrangement of author names in the authorship list should be made only before the manuscript has been accepted and only if approved by the journal editor. To request such a change, the editor must receive the following from the corresponding author: (a) the reason for the change in author list and (b) written confirmation (e-mail, letter) from all authors that they freely consent to the addition, removal or rearrangement. In the case of addition or removal of authors, this includes confirmation from the author being added or removed that they have freely provided such consent.
Only in exceptional, perhaps extenuating circumstances will the editor consider the addition, deletion or rearrangement of authors after the manuscript has been accepted. When such is the case, publication of the manuscript under such review shall be suspended while the editor considers the request. In rare cases and if the manuscript has already been published in an online issue, any requests approved by the editor may result in a corrigendum.
Ethics Approval
When reporting a study that involved human participants, their data or biological material, authors should include a statement that confirms that the study was approved (or granted exemption) by the appropriate institutional and/or national research ethics committee (including the name of the ethics committee) and certify that the study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration or comparable standards, the authors must explain the reasons for their approach, and demonstrate that an independent ethics committee or institutional review board explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. If a study was granted exemption from requiring ethics approval, this should also be detailed in the manuscript (including the reasons for the exemption).
3. Ethical Obligations of Reviewers
Manuscript review is an essential step in the process of publishing and peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication. So, EPR shares the view of many people that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify and return the manuscript to the editor immediately. Or they should remind the editor of the possibility of delaying the review and give a possible return time.
Based on the standards of maintaining a high level of scientific and textual expression, referees should be objectively evaluated the quality of the manuscript, the level of the experiments and the theory, the rationality of the interpretation and inference. Referees should respect the independence of the author's thought. Selected referee shall not have a personal or business relationship with the authors or partner of the paper affecting the evaluation impartial.
Information contained in an article under review is confidential and shall not be shared with others, nor shall reviewers use non-public information contained in an article to advance their own research or financial interests. Referee comments should be explained sufficiently with the basis of his (her) judgment in order to be understood by the editor and the author. The facts or opinions in the evaluation comments shall be attached to related literature to avoid lacking basis assertions. Referees should identify whether the important relevant published work has been cited or not by the authors. It is absolutely forbidden guiding the author to cite the reviewer's own paper. The authors should be reminded of the substantive similarities between the author's manuscript content and published papers or manuscripts submitted to other journals. Additionally, personal criticism of the author is deemed inappropriate.
4. Article Retraction & Withdrawal
In making a decision regarding Article Retraction or Withdrawal, the Editor is guided by journal policies and may be constrained by such legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. An outcome of this principle is predicated on the importance of the scholarly archive as a permanent, historic record of the transactions of scholarship: articles which have been published shall remain extant, exact and unaltered as much as possible. However, occasionally circumstances may arise where an article is published that must later be retracted or even removed. Such actions carry a heavy ethical and legal burden and can only occur under exceptional circumstances.
Universal Wiser recognizes the importance of the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record to researchers and the wider academic community. Honest errors are a part of humanness of the science and publishing, therefore require publication of a notification of corrigendum when such are detected. We adhere to the highest ethical standards to maintain the trust in and correctness of our electronic archive. In all cases, our official archives in the "e-Depot" of the National Library of Singapore will retain all article versions, including retracted or otherwise removed articles. Our publications operate according to the enunciated policies for adding corrigenda to published scholarly material.
Article retraction
Generally, the article retraction will be conducted for the publication misconduct such as multiple submissions, duplicate publication, plagiarism, data fabrication, and other issues that may cause infringements of professional ethical codes. Occasionally, a retraction will be used to correct errors in submission or publication. Once the suspicion of the misconduct or the request of retraction is come up with, the editors will organize investigations and take necessary actions along with the best practice guidelines.
Note that if authors retain copyright for an article, this does not mean they automatically have the right to retract it after publication. The integrity of the published scientific record is of paramount importance and COPE's Retraction Guidelines still apply and override any other considerations in such cases.
Article removal: legal limitations
In an extremely limited number of cases, it may be necessary to remove an article from the online database. This will only occur where the article is clearly defamatory, or infringes upon others' legal rights, or where the article is, or Universal Wiser has good reason to expect it will be, the subject of a court order, or where the article, if acted upon, might pose a potentially serious health risk to consumers. In these circumstances, while the metadata (Title and Authors) will be retained, the text will be replaced with a screen, indicating the article has been removed for legal reasons.
Article replacement
In cases where the article, if acted upon, might pose a potentially serious health risk, the authors of the original article may wish to retract the flawed original and replace it with a corrected version. In such circumstances, the procedures for retraction will be followed by a specification that the database retraction notice will publish a link to the corrected re-published article and a history of the document.
Authors may appeal for a rejection decision. Authors should send the appeal request by an email to the Editorial Office of the journal. Detailed reasons, point-by-point responses to reviewers' and/or editor's comments must be included in the appeal request. The journal coordinator will manage the appeal request and consult with the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, Senior Editor, or/and Editorial Team members. Decisions for the appeal will be final with no further alternations allowed.
The complaints or concerns on the editorial work, publications or other journal issues can be sent to the Publisher publisher@wiserpub.com or the service center service@wiserpub.com. The publisher will handle the complaint appropriately along with the COPE.
Copyright Policy
Journals published by Universal Wiser are fully open access: research articles, reviews or any other content on this platform is available to everyone free of charge to maximize the benefits to readers, authors and editors, consistent with the tenets of the concept of Creative Commons Attributions. To this effect, all content is distributed under 
Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
1. License
Copyright licenses detail the rights for publication, distribution, and use of research. Open Access articles published by Universal Wiser do not require transfer of copyright, as the copyright remains with the author. In opting for open access, the author(s) should agree to publish the article under the CC BY license (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License). The CC BY license allows for maximum dissemination and re-use of open access materials and is preferred by many research funding bodies. Under this license, users are free to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose including for commercial purposes, providing they attribute the contribution in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
2. Images and Features
We support the use of original materials such as images and features as an argument for articles. Among these, some articles (especially Reviews) may contain figures, tables or text taken from other publications, for which Universal Wiser does not hold the copyright or the right to re-license the published material. Please note as the author, your sole responsibility to inquire with the original copyright holder (usually the original publisher or authors), whether or not the material you intend to appropriate can be re-used. If there is any doubt that the original copyright holder has granted such a re-use privilege, then it is assumed that it has not been granted. In that case, authors do not have the right to use them.
Archiving Policy
To ensure permanent access to our publications, we work with different partners to archive our content:
A full archival copy of all publications is deposited both in electronic and print format in the Singapore National Library. Records of deposited publications are available via PublicationSG online catalogue.
The contents of EPR are archived and preserved by PKP PN and Portico.
Authors are encouraged to self-archive the final version of their published articles into institutional repositories (such as those listed in the Directory of Open Access Repositories). For this purpose, authors are strongly encouraged to use the final PDF version published on the website of Universal Wiser.
For the purposes of record-keeping, Universal Wiser retains copies of submitted manuscripts and supporting files. However, for articles that are rejected we will comply with requests from authors to delete files from our database.
Advertising Policy
All advertisements are subject to approval of the Publisher, Editors, or publishing partners of Universal Wiser Publisher which reserves the right to reject or cancel any advertisement at any time.
Statements in advertisements should carry no direct or implied disparagement of another product. There should be no statements that are misleading, exaggerated, or contrary to proven facts. Advertisements may not be indecent, obscene, or defamatory.
The principle of maintaining editorial independence from commercial influence underlies decision-making. Editorial decisions are not influenced by advertising.
Advertisements must be clearly identifiable as advertisements and clearly distinguishable from editorial content. Universal Wiser Publisher will not publish advertisements in the form of editorial content.