TAGA JOURNAl of       




Sketty, Swansea, SA2 0QG, United Kingdom



Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

TAGA Journal is an international peer-reviewed electronic journal. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the editorial board, editors, authors, peer reviewers and the publisher. 



Authors are required to submit their article through

the following E.Mail: submit@tagajournal.com / tagajournal@gmail.com

Paper format download



Abstract of each accepted paper will be published online immediately.


Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed TAGA Journal is an essential element in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It directly reflects the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. The peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree on the ethical behavior standards expected of all parties involved in the publication act: the author, the editor of the journal, the reviewer, the publisher and the society.

Publication Decisions

The editors of the TAGA Journal are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance for researchers and readers must always lead to such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the editorial board of the journal and constrained by the legal requirements that will then apply in respect of defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. In making the decision, the editors may confer with other editors or reviewers.

1. Fair play

Editors evaluate manuscripts only based on their intellectual content, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors.

2. Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial team shall not disclose any information on a manuscript submitted to anyone other than the authors, reviewers, prospective reviewers, other editorial advisors and the publisher, as the case may be.

3. Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in any form of an editor’s own research without the written consent of the author.


Duties of Reviewers

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

The peer review helps the editor make editorial decisions. It can also help the author to improve the paper, through editorial communications with the author.

2. Promptness

Any chosen referee who does not feel qualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that he/she would not be able to review on time should inform the editor and apologize for the review process.

3. Privacy Policy

All manuscripts received for review should be treated as confidential documents. They must not be presented or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.

4. Objectivity

Reviews must be carried out objectively. The personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees must clearly articulate their points of view with supporting arguments.

5. Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors. Any statement containing an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be presented with the relevant citation. A reviewer should also draw the editor’s attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published document of which they have personal knowledge.

6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Insider information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal purposes. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative or other relationships or connections with the authors, corporations, or institutions related to the manuscripts.

Duties of Authors

1. Reporting Standards

Authors of original research reports must provide an accurate account of the work done and an objective discussion of its importance. The underlying data must be accurately represented in the manuscript. A manuscript should contain enough details and references to allow others to reproduce the work. Fraudulent or knowingly incorrect statements are unethical and unacceptable.

2. Data Access and Retention

The authors should give a public access to raw data (if any) in relation to the editorial review. This data should be retained even for a necessary time after publication.

3. Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must guarantee that their works are entirely original and any citations for other works and/or words in the manuscript have been properly done.

4. Multiple, Redundant or Simultaneous Publication

An author should generally not publish manuscripts containing essentially the same results in more than one primary journal or publication. Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal is considered unethical and unacceptable.

5. Recognition of Sources

Appropriate recognition of the work of others must always be given. Authors must cite publications that have influenced the nature of the work reported.

6. Authorship

Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed significantly to the reported research results. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. If there are others involved in some of the substantive aspects of the research project, then they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included in the manuscript and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to the submission for publication.

7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors must disclose in their manuscripts any financial or other conflicts of interest that could be interpreted as having an influence on the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's duty to promptly inform the editor or publisher of the journal and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.


Special Issue policy


1. Special Issue articles shall be in the TAGA´s scope as indicated in the Aim & Scope section,

2. Authors must accept TAGA´s policy during the submission act,

3. A coordinator must be indicated and correspondence will be exchanged only with him,

5. Articles must be reviewed previously by authors; it will be not submitted to pair’s revision,

6. Articles must be strictly in the TAGA´s rules for submission. 

7. You must send the revision certificate for each manuscript by respectively reviewers,

8. We strongly suggest a good drafted manuscript in English, we will not revise English language and,  it will be returned to authors if will be the case,

9. We have by policy to list one good article to be revised and published in the current number of the journal, indicated by you with agreement by our Editorial board,


Publication and online maintenance charges


 A charge of US$ 250/- per full paper from author’s institution is required. 


Publication Cycle



An effort is made to publish a paper duly recommended by referees within a period of 30 days.

Papers received are immediately processed. Once the paper gets through the screening, it is passed on to the handling Editor who assigns referees with expertise in the field of work in the paper. Referees are requested to provide their reports within a period of 10 days. The reports of the referees help the handling Editor to arrive at a decision. In case of recommendation for revision, the Editor may advise the authors to re-submit their paper after due revision as per suggestions/comments of the referees. The revised paper is again evaluated by the same referees. On receiving the final decision from the Editor, the Editorial office makes necessary correspondence with the author(s). In case of clear recommendation for publication, the galley proofs of the paper are sent to the corresponding author. After the receipt of the corrected galley proofs, an effort is made to accommodate the paper in an issue to appear next.