!?php qtrans_generateLanguageSelectCode($type='image'); ?>
The editor board of our journal works in accordance with the code of international publication ethics, including the best practice of decency, privacy, vigilance over the scientific publications, and consideration of possible conflict of interests.
The editorial board follows the recommendations of Committee on Publication Ethics, Code of Conduct for Journal Editor, and the best practice of leading world-known scientific publications.
The authors have to report only their original results of their research and objective discussion of research significance. All data underlining the research must be accurately represented in the paper. The paper has to contain sufficient amount of information to permit other researchers to check and reproduce the provided experiments. All fraudulent and knowingly false statements are to be treated as unethical behavior and thus unacceptable.
The authors may be asked to provide raw data underlining the research for editorial review. The authors must be ready to provide free access to such data if it is possible. The authors should be ready for saving such data for a reasonable time after the paper publication.
The authors have to submit entirely original research. If the authors have used text or graphic information taken from the other works, this has to be appropriately cited or approved with the appropriate written owner’s permission. Plagiarism in every its form is treated as unethical behavior and thus unacceptable.
Authors must point out that their paper is published for the first time. If parts of the manuscript have been already published in another paper, authors have to reference to the previous paper and name the significant difference of their new paper from the previous one. Copying and paraphrasing of own papers are unacceptable. They can be used only as the background for new conclusions. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal is treated as unethical behavior and thus unacceptable.
The authors must acknowledge contribution of other people who personally influenced the nature of the presented research. The authors have to reference to the related works cited in their paper. Entire information obtained privately, as in form of conversation, correspondence, or discussion with the third parties, must be used only with written permission from the owners.
Authorship is to be strictly limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the research. All those who have made a significant contribution to the work must be listed as co-authors of the paper. The corresponding author has to ensure that all co-authors have approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to publication.
If the work involves procedures or equipment which have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.
In their paper, the authors must disclose any financial or other conflict of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their research. All sources of financial support for the research must be disclosed.
If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the manuscript, it is the author’s duty to notify the journal editorial board and cooperate with the editorial board to remove or correct the errors. If the editor or the publisher learns from the third party that already published paper contains significant errors, it is the obligation of the author to retract or correct the paper or provide to the editor an evidence of the correctness of the original paper.
The article submitting assumes that it contains new nontrivial scientific results, originally achieved by the authors and published for the first time. Each article is to be reviewed. The process of the paper reviewing is blinded: the reviewer knows the author, but the author does not know the reviewer. The reviewers can freely point to the motivated critical comments concerning the level and presentation clarity of the manuscript, its correspondence to the journal theme, novelty and reliability of the research results. Reviewer recommendations are to be a basis for making a final decision of the paper publishing. The journal editorial board is fully responsible for the paper publishing. The editorial board makes its decision being guided by the policy of the journal’s editorial board, legal requirements in accordance with copyright law. The editorial board evaluates the manuscript for their scientific content without regard to race, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic grouping, citizenship, and political views of the authors.
The journal editor and every editorial staff members are not to disclose any information about submitted papers to anyone other than the corresponding authors, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher. Unpublished paper must not be used in the editor’s or any editorial staff member’s own research without the written agreement with the author.
The editor has to pass the submitted paper to another editorial board member for reviewing and making a final decision of the paper publishing in case of conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships, or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions related to that paper. The editor has to request all the participants to disclose their conflicts of interest. If conflict of interest is disclosed after the paper publication, the editorial board has to make the corrections publishing. The editor in cooperation with the publisher (or society) have to take reasonably responsive measures, if ethical complaints have been presented concerning the submitted manuscript or the published paper. Every reported fact of unethical behavior will be looked through, even if it is discovered after publication.
Reviewing supports the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Any selected reviewer who feels unskilled for reviewing the research represented in the scientific manuscript or who knows that his (her) reviewing process will be too long must notify the editor and excuse himself (herself) from the paper reviewing process.
Any manuscript submitted for the reviewing must be treated as a confidential document. It must not be shown to or discussed with other excepts without the editor’s permission.
Review must be objectively done. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate. The reviewers are forced to express their own opinion clearly and reasonably.
The reviewers have to identify the relevant published works that have not been cited by the paper authors. Any statements, conclusions and arguments which had been reported earlier must be accompanied by relevant citations. The reviewer has also pay the editor’s attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the submitted manuscript and any other published paper known to the reviewer.
Unpublished manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without written agreement with the paper author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through the reviewing must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal advantages. The reviewers have not to participate in the reviewing the submitted papers if they have their personal interest.