STM JOURNALS an imprint of CELNET is established with the goal of being a powerful tool for setting the standards for research.
STM Journals is a peer-reviewed Bi-annual & Tri-annual journals primarily with 243 journals focusing on multi-disciplinary approaches to writing. A Professional Commissioning Board oversees the Journal, with an Editorial Board assisting them.
Author Access to the Journal Articles
Journal allows free access to its corresponding author for the period of three months in which the author can view and download all the published articles in that particular Journal.
Hard copy compilation of all the Journals is also available at the end of the year to all the authors at nominal prices.
Any changes to authorship either during the peer review process or after acceptance must be confirmed by all named authors, and a reason for any addition/removal provided to the Journal- manager.
The manuscript should include full affiliation of the institution and the authorship is a joint decision of all the authors and some co-authors who have contributed to a part of the article are also entitled for the full authorship of the article.
Manuscripts that include trials on animals or human beings should include documentation of the proof of approval obtained by the ethical board.
Hard copy compilation of all the Journals is also available at the end of the ISSUE Publication in print to all the authors at nominal prices. Authors are advised to book their print issues for preserving their work along with the certificate.
This is for Indian Authors, we can give a discount for students.
While determining the authorship, the prime principle is to look for the person(s) who is the creator of thought/embodied idea (conception, design, execution, or analysis and interpretation of data). Authors should ensure that all those who have made significant contributions are given the opportunity to be graded as authors. Authors should be practically involved in drafting the article, its revision, and appraisal. Other individuals who have also contributed to the study should be duly acknowledged. Manuscripts should include a full list of the current institutional affiliations of all authors, both academic and corporate. The order in the authorship has to be a joint decision of all the participating authors. Some co-authors will be accountable for the entire article, for instance, those who provide critical data, write the manuscript, or provide leadership to the junior fellows. Other co-authors may be responsible for some specific contributions to a paper. It is unethical to publish articles describing essentially the same studies or results in more than one primary research journal. Submitting the same article in more than one journal in parallel is unethical and unacceptable. Submission of a manuscript to the Journal for its consideration of publication implies that the manuscript is free from any kind of conflicts/irregularities including those discussed above. Manuscripts depicting studies in which animals trials have been conducted must document that the study was approved by an ethical review board before it was done.
Few authors who are unable to submit manuscripts in a decent written format with grammatical and language errors and who request assistance for the same will be charged.
Only two papers from one university will be accepted in one journal (per ISSUE).
In the ISSUE, an author can only submit one paper.
Authors are responsible for ensuring that their works are original and that any content that is not wholly their own is fully acknowledged. Law Journals uses software such as Viper, Plagiarism checker, and copy scape to ensure that copy-free content is accepted and published. (i.e., replicating any content without acknowledgment and permission) and considers the authors' inclusion of plagiarised content to be misconduct.
- All manuscripts are initially evaluated by the editors. It's uncommon, but it's possible that excellent work will be accepted at this point. Those who are rejected at this stage have major scientific problems or are outside the journal's purpose and scope. Those that fulfil the basic requirements are sent to at least two specialists for evaluation. Authors of submissions that are rejected at this stage will be notified within two weeks of receipt or will be given recommendations for resubmission from reviewers.
- Without going through the regular peer review process, manuscripts containing plagiarism, significant highly technical errors, or a lack of a relevant message are rejected. Manuscripts that do not fall within the scope of the Journal may also be rejected at this stage.
- Final Acceptance- The author will be notified of the final decision to accept or reject the submission, as well as any recommendations provided by the reviewers, which may include direct remarks from the reviewers.
- If an author desires to appeal a peer review decision, he or she should write to the Editors-in-Chief and discuss the problem. Appeals will be successful only if the reviews were insufficient or unjust. If this is the case, the document will be submitted to new reviewers who have agreed to re-review it.
- After receiving comments from reviewers/Referees, members of the Editorial Board teams have the authority to make the final decision on publication. The corresponding author will be notified of the acceptance, rejection, or amendment of the paper.
- If there are any minor or large changes, the corresponding author should send an orderly response to each of the reviewers' comments and a revised version of the manuscript to the editor.
- The paper will not be accepted for publication until it has been approved by the editor and reviewers/referees.
- Articles would be copy-edited for grammar, punctuation, print style, and format if they were accepted. Page proofs will be given to the appropriate author and must be returned within three days, with or without corrections.
- During the submission and review process, the corresponding author (or coauthor designated) will act as the primary correspondent with the editorial office on behalf of all co-authors.
- The journal carefully adheres to the double-blind review method, in which neither the author nor the reviewer is aware of the other's identity.
- Although authors are invited to recommend reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief and the editorial office have the right to choose different reviewers. The authors are in the best position to know who is an expert in the topic, thus they are asked to nominate reviewers. Furthermore, the suggested reviewers might be appropriate for other papers on the same subject. As a result, getting these names can assist the editorial office in ensuring that appropriate persons are contacted to examine all articles.
Type of Contributions
- Research Articles- These articles report research work or original research findings that have not been published and are not under consideration for publication elsewhere. The length of the article should not normally exceed 7000 words. An abstract of less than 250 words is preferred.
- Review Articles- These contributions are usually commissioned by the Journal However, high-quality unsolicited review articles are also considered. These articles review and discuss developments in a given domain. These are expected to be well-focused and organized, and refrain from adopting a general ‘textbook’ style. The length of the review article should not exceed 6000 words. An abstract of less than 250 words is preferred. The number of references should be limited to about 100 in number.
- Case analysis- It can be related to a summary of any case, or in any particular domain related to cyber cases, criminal cases, civil disputes, or others.
Journal makes available (through the internet) the final camera-ready copy (revised version, if any) of a manuscript to the principal author/author responsible for correspondence, for final proofreading/check. No changes in the accepted thought contents are allowed at this stage. The Authors should note that the ultimate responsibility for ensuring the accuracy, the inclusion of up-to-date suggested revisions rests upon them.
No journal is competent to sue such cases. We believe that employers have the prime responsibility for ensuring their researchers and conducting ethical training.
Journal like other journals, do not have the resources or legal legitimacy to investigate scientific misconduct.
However, the Publication Management Team of the Journal may seek advice/ information from a concerned referee or editorial board member, in case it comes/ brought to its notice, evidence that trust has been significantly compromised by an author or referee's actions.
We may attempt to redress the matter by appropriate corrections in the Journal and if deemed fit may communicate (as per Journal norms) to the employers or funding agencies.
Authors are responsible for ensuring that their works are original and that any content that is not wholly their own is fully acknowledged. The journal will use various software to check manuscripts for plagiarism (i.e., replicating any content without acknowledgment and permission) and considers the authors' inclusion of plagiarised content to be misconduct.
Plagiarism is copying of idea, thought, and text of someone else without proper citation and presenting it as one’s own idea or thought work.
It is the responsibility of the author to obtain the permission of the previous author to reuse or republish his work.
Law Journals uses software such as Viper, Plagiarism checker, and copy scape to ensure that copy-free content is accepted and published.
Authors should ensure that the manuscript that they are submitting is plagiarism-free and all the citations are properly provided at the right place. It should also be noted that citations do not justify mass copying of content to which the owner has the rights.
Conflict of Interest.
A conflict of interest is characterized as a circumstance in which a person's personal relationships (e.g., friend, colleague, or family), professional relationships (e.g., working for a business), or financial influences (e.g., funding) will influence their judgment during the journal's publishing.
Reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest (COI) that may influence their evaluation of any manuscript they review. The conflict of interest may not preclude them from reading the paper, but it must be disclosed to the Editor-in-Chief as soon as it is discovered.
Authors must state any conflicts of interest (COI) that may have influenced their research (e.g. financing) or decision to submit to the journal (both within the paper and to the Editor-in-Chief).
Without the influence of the publisher or any external bodies, the editors have the power to choose which pieces to consider for publishing and which to accept or reject.
Responsibilities as an Editor
The journal editors have a responsibility to treat all submissions with confidentiality and to make impartial decisions in a timely way. The editors are responsible for deciding which papers will be published, as well as for not bringing the magazine into discredit (by knowingly accepting bad quality or unethical articles or by failing to comply with the journal policies). The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for appointing the Editorial Board.
If an author, reviewer, reader, or other individual has a complaint about the journal or its editors, they should first contact the publisher. The complaint will be handled by the appropriate publishing or editorial person whenever possible. If a resolution isn't sufficient, it will be forwarded to a higher-ranking official for resolution.