Publication Ethics

Solar Cell Insights follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices. All parties — authors, editors, reviewers and the publisher — are expected to meet the standards below.

Authors

Authors must ensure that submitted work is original, has not been published elsewhere, and is not under consideration by another journal. All relevant prior work must be properly cited. Materials, device fabrication, measurement conditions and data analysis procedures must be described clearly enough for the work to be assessed and repeated. Data must not be fabricated, selectively omitted, or manipulated in a way that misrepresents the result. Any potential conflict of interest must be disclosed at submission. Where an error is discovered after publication, the author must notify the journal promptly.

Reviewers

Reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts as confidential, decline invitations where a competing interest exists, provide assessments that are specific and evidence-based rather than dismissive, and alert the editor to any substantial overlap with published work. Reviewers must not use a manuscript under review for their own advantage, and must not upload it to any third-party service, including generative AI tools.

Editors

Editors are responsible for the decision to publish. Decisions are made on the scientific merit of the work and its fit with the journal's scope, without regard to the authors' nationality, institution, seniority, gender, or funding source. Editors must not handle manuscripts in which they have a competing interest. Editors must preserve the confidentiality of submitted material and act on credible concerns about published work.

Publisher

SAMTrek UG (haftungsbeschränkt) does not interfere in editorial decisions. The publisher's responsibilities are to maintain the journal's infrastructure, ensure that published articles remain accessible, and support editors in investigating concerns about published work.

Plagiarism and text recycling

Manuscripts are screened for overlap with published literature. Substantial reuse of another author's text or figures without attribution results in rejection, and where the work is already published, in retraction. Limited reuse of an author's own methods text is acceptable where the source is cited; wholesale reuse of one's own previously published work is not.

Screening tool not yet in place Automated similarity screening requires a paid Crossref Similarity Check (iThenticate) account, which follows Crossref membership. Until it exists, screening is editorial and manual — reading, searching distinctive phrases, and checking figures. The wording above says "screened", which remains true under manual screening. Do not name iThenticate on the site until the account is active.

Allegations of misconduct

Concerns may be raised in confidence with ethics@[DOMAIN]. The journal follows COPE flowcharts in investigating allegations. The corresponding author is given the opportunity to respond before any action is taken. Where an allegation is substantiated, the journal will issue a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction as appropriate, and may notify the authors' institution.

Complaints

Complaints about editorial process, turnaround, or the conduct of the journal should be sent to editor@[DOMAIN] and will be acknowledged within ten working days.