For Authors:

Reporting Standards: Authors must present an accurate report of the original research conducted and an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers must present their results honestly without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate manipulation of data. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to enable others to replicate the research. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate data presentation is unethical and unacceptable. Manuscripts must adhere to the Murai Journal template.

Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they write entirely original works. Submitted manuscripts should be new and unpublished.

Acknowledgment of Sources: Authors must acknowledge all data sources used in the research through proper citation (Footnote and Bodynote). Proper acknowledgment of others' work must always be given.

Authorship of the Article: Authorship should accurately reflect individual contributions based on expertise.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in the submitted manuscript, they must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the manuscript.

For Editors:

Publication Decisions: Based on review reports from reviewers, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validity of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive such decisions. Editors may be guided by the journal's editorial board policies and constrained by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult with other editors or reviewers in making such decisions. The editorial team must be responsible for all published content and should have procedures and policies to ensure the quality of published material and maintain the integrity of the published articles.

Manuscript Review: Editors must ensure that each manuscript is first evaluated by an editor for originality and suitability for the journal's scope. Editors must ensure a fair and wise peer review process. Editors should explain the peer review process through information for authors. Editors should conduct appropriate peer review of manuscripts considered for publication by selecting people with adequate and relevant expertise and endeavor to avoid conflicts of interest.

Fair Play: Editors must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for intellectual content without considering the authors' gender, race, religion, nationality, etc.

Confidentiality: Editors must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors is kept confidential. Editors must critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and confidentiality of the authors.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Journal editors will not use unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts without the authors' written consent. Editors should not be involved in decisions about manuscripts where they have conflicts of interest.

For Reviewers:

Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors must be kept confidential. They should not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all data sources used in the research. Reviewers must identify relevant published work cited by the authors. Reviewers should promptly inform the editor if they detect deviations, potentially unethical behavior, substantial similarity between the manuscript and simultaneous submissions to other journals or published articles, or suspect that errors may have occurred during the research or writing and submission of the manuscript.

Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively, and reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should follow the journal's guidelines on the specific feedback required from them unless there is an argumentative reason not to do so. Reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help authors improve their manuscripts. Reviewers should clarify which additional studies they suggest are crucial to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Timeliness: Reviewers should respond within a reasonable timeframe according to established policies. Reviewers should agree to review manuscripts only if they are confident they can return the review within the proposed or mutually agreed timeframe and promptly inform the journal if they require an extension. If a reviewer finds it impossible to complete the review within the specified time, they should communicate with the editor so the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.