Aperture is committed to cultivating an open and accessible environment for all. We follow the Organization for Human Brain Mapping in their Code of Conduct, and we expect this code to be honored by the Aperture community. Authors are encouraged to critically consider the balance of citations in their work and strive for gender and geographic balance in the resources they chose to cite.
Authors, editors, and reviewers will are expected to adhere to the Code of Conduct in all Aperture spaces.
In Aperture's efforts to be inclusive and diverse, we pledge to hold ourselves accountable in the following ways (this is by no means an exhaustive or complete list).
Aperture expects all editors, reviewers, and authors to conduct themselves ethically. Unethical behavior will be brought to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief and the Aperture Oversight Committee. Such behavior could result in the termination of an individual's role within Aperture or the paper's withdrawal. If an author brings up a concern, Aperture will record these issues and give a resolution to the author, editor, or reviewer depending on the circumstance and context surrounding the case. To report a concern, please contact the journal manager. Editors and Reviewers are expected to conduct themselves with integrity and objectivity. Aperture's editorial team is composed of experts in the field and individuals who may be at the start or midpoint of their careers. The full names and affiliations of the editorial team will be available to the public on the Aperture website and general contact information.
Aperture is committed to the highest standards of excellence in submitting, reviewing, and publication of research objects.
All authors, editors, and Peer Reviewers are required to declare any conflicting interests that could negatively impact the journal's integrity. Aperture defines a conflict of interest as any potential situations, relationship, financial or otherwise, that could influence, hinder, or interfere with an unbiased review and publication process. Following the Committee on Publication Ethics recommendations, we require that all authors disclose all funding to the research and follow Aperture's guidelines on authorship when listing all authors and contributors who contributed the work and their respective contributions.
Aperture's Handling Editors and Reviewers will not make any editorial decisions regarding their scholarly work. Editors and editorial board members who serve on the editorial board of competing journals are not excluded from serving on Aperture.
Aperture will typically not reject works solely based on self-citation. However, the journal will carefully vet submissions for potential cases of citation manipulation. If the author or any party affiliated with Aperture uses self-citation for illegitimate reasons where it is clear the citations are being used as a means of self-promotion or to artificially bolster the individual’s h-index, this will be considered unethical and the work will be rejected or removed from the platform. Any affiliated Aperture parties that are found to be engaging in promotional self-citation may find themselves removed from their role.
If Aperture suspects an author of citation manipulation:
Authors are required to participate in the Peer-Review process and have their identity known to the peer-reviewers at the start of the review process. If an author is concerned about having specific individuals review their work, they will contact the journal manager.
The submitting author must be a significant contributor to the work per the requirements of the author guidelines. Authors are also obligated to report any errors, corrections, or retractions to the Editorial team as soon they become aware of an issue. Authors will include a data availability statement, a declaration of interest, and check a box as part of the final submission step indicating that the author has read and acknowledges Aperture's Code of Conduct, Author responsibilities, and Ethics Guidelines.
Aperture will not tolerate plagiarism or libelous or defamatory language in research objects, and the use of such instances could result in the rejection or retraction of a submission. As defined by the Office of Research Integrity, and described by the ORI (Office of Research Integrity), plagiarism can include "theft or misappropriation of intellectual property and the substantial unattributed textual copying of another's work." All Research Objects will be screened via plagiarism detection software. If an author is reusing a similar methodology to prior published works, please be transparent about this in submission. Plagiarism detection could result in the author being asked for clarification or the Research Object being rejected.
Aperture will be committed to correcting errors and updating published Research Objects.