There is a need to agree on ethical standards for all parties involved in the publication process: author, journal editor, reviewer, and publisher. The publication ethics of the journal comply with the guidelines based on the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors).
1. Decision to publish. The editor decides which of the articles sent to the editorial office should be published. The editor has the right to be guided by the policy of the editorial board, but may be limited by applicable law. The editor may consult with other editors or reviewers to make a decision.
2. Tolerance. The editor evaluates the intellectual content of the manuscripts regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship or political views of the author.
3. Confidentiality. The editor and editorial staff may not disclose information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial consultants and, if necessary, the publisher. Any manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. Materials should not be shown or discussed with others except those authorized by the editor.
4. Disclosures and Conflicts of Interest. Unpublished materials used in the submitted manuscript should not be used in the editor’s own research without the written consent of the author. Confidential information or ideas obtained during the review process should be kept secret and not used for personal interests. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they see a conflict of interest arising from competition, collaboration, or other relationship with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the article.
5. Responsibilities of Reviewers. Contribution to editorial decisions Reviewing helps the editor in making editorial decisions, and communication between the editor and the author can be designed to help the author improve his work.
6. Efficiency. Any selected reviewer who feels incompetent to review a study presented in a manuscript, or believes that prompt review of the manuscript will not be possible, should notify the editor and exclude himself from the peer review process.
7. Objectivity. Reviews must be objective. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their opinion clearly and reasonably.
8. Confirmation of sources. Corresponding references to the works of other authors are required. Authors should cite publications that have a determining influence on the nature of the work presented. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the author. Any statement, observation, conclusion or argument must be accompanied by an appropriate reference. The reviewer should also draw the editor’s attention to any significant similarities or overlaps between the manuscript in question and any other published work.
9. Obligations of Authors. The article must contain sufficient detail to ensure that the work is verifiable. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate information is unethical and unacceptable.
10. Originality and plagiarism. The authors of the article must ensure that they have submitted a completely original work, in the case of using the work and / or citations of other authors, bibliographic references or excerpts are required. All articles submitted to the editorial office are checked for plagiarism through the “Antiplagiat” system, for acceptance the article must have at least 85% of the uniqueness of the text.
11. Multiple, simultaneous publications. An author must not publish papers that describe essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
12. Authorship of the article. Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the concept, design, execution or interpretation of the presented study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. If there are other contributors, they should be listed as contributors. The author must ensure that there are objective co-authors and that
all co-authors saw and approved the final version of the article and agreed to submit it for publication.
13. Disclosures and Conflicts of Interest. All authors are required to disclose funding information in their work, as well as the existence of third party interests that may be perceived to have influenced the results or interpretation of their manuscript.
14. Errors in published works. When an author discovers a material error or inaccuracy in his published work, the author must report it to the editor of the journal or publisher and cooperate with the editor to remove or correct the article.
We recognize the following as unethical behavior in the field of scientific publications, according to the RASSEP declaration:
- The requirement for authors to independently provide reviews of their own articles, as well as contractual and pseudo-reviewing. This practice implies the absence of peer review in the journal.
- Proposal of agency services. Providing such services to authors as “turnkey publication”, correspondence with the editors on behalf of the author, revision of articles by the agent on the recommendation of the reviewer, preparation of paid reviews.
- Sale of co-authorship, gift co-authorship, change in the composition of authors. It is a violation of copyright and ethical norms, since it not only misleads readers, but is also regarded as fraudulent.
- Publication of materials of correspondence “scientific” conferences. Since the practice of such conferences is directly related to fraud and fraud in the field of science, the publication of the materials of these conferences is regarded as unethical, contributing to the dissemination of pseudoscientific texts.
- Transfer of the texts of articles to other journals without the consent of the authors. The publication of an article in a journal that has not been agreed with the author is a violation of the interests of the author.
- Transfer of materials by authors to third parties. The transfer of articles sent to the editorial office to third parties, except for reviewers and editorial staff, is a violation of copyright and the principle of confidentiality of editorial processes.
- Citation manipulation. Artificial increase in scientometric indices, excessive self-citation and friendly citations, irrelevant links mislead readers and are interpreted as fraudulent.
- Plagiarism, falsification and fabrication. The editors conscientiously work with the texts of articles, preventing the appearance of unscrupulous scientific publications containing plagiarism, falsification and fabrication of data on the pages of their publications.