Publication ethics

The journal is committed to upholding the standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices.

The Editorial Board of the journal behaves in accordance with the codes of conduct and international standards established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The editors of the journal reserve the right to refuse publication of works in case any malpractice is revealed.

1. Duties of the editors  

1.1. Publication decision. The editor of the journal is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. Validation of the work in question and of its importance to researchers and readers must always support such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as are in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

1.2. Fair play. The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

1.3. Confidentiality. The editor and any editorial staff of the journal must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

1.4. Disclosure and conflicts of interest. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

1.5. Vigilance over published record. An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.

1.6. Involvement and cooperation in investigations. An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, acting in conjunction with the publisher. Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.

1.7. Handling allegations of plagiarism. The editors seek to uphold academic integrity and to protect authors’ moral rights. We take all cases of plagiarism very seriously being aware of the potential impact an allegation of plagiarism can have on a researcher’s career. Therefore, we have procedures in place to deal with alleged cases of plagiarism. In order to take an unbiased approach, we investigate each case thoroughly, seeking clarification from all affected parties. If we are approached by a third party with an allegation of plagiarism, we always seek a response from the original author(s) or copyright holder(s) before we decide on a course of action. We will not be influenced by other parties and will form our decisions in an unbiased and objective manner.

2. Duties of reviewers 

2.1. Contribution to editorial decisions. Peer review helps the editor to make editorial decisions. It also may assist the authors in improving their papers, through the editorial communications with the authors. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication. The publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

2.2. Promptness. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor of the journal and excuse himself from the review process.

2.3. Confidentiality. All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

2.4. Objectivity. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

2.5. Acknowledgement of sources. Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors. Any statement (observation, derivation, argument) that was previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

2.6. Disclosure and conflicts of interest. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

3. Duties of authors  

3.1. Reporting standards. Authors should present an accurate account of the work performed, as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be presented accurately in the paper. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

3.2. Originality. Articles submitted to the journal must not have been published before in their current or substantially similar form, or be under consideration for publication with another journal. All authors submitting their works acknowledge that they have disclosed all actual or potential conflicts of interest regarding authorship and publication of the work and will indemnify the publisher against any breach of such warranty. If the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this must be appropriately cited or quoted.

3.3. Plagiarism. Plagiarism takes many forms: passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Particularly, the following is unacceptable:

•  verbatim copying of a significant part of another person’s work without acknowledgement, references or the use of quotation marks;
•  improper paraphrasing of another person’s work, where more than one sentence within a paragraph or section of text has been changed or sentences have been rearranged without appropriate attribution. Significant improper paraphrasing without appropriate attribution is treated as seriously as verbatim copying;
•  re-use of elements of another person’s work (for example, a figure, table or paragraph) without acknowledgement, references or the use of quotation marks; 
•  self-plagiarism: if some elements of a work have been previously published in another paper the author is required to acknowledge the earlier work and indicate how the subsequent work differs and builds upon the research and conclusions contained in the previous work. Verbatim copying of own works and their paraphrasing are unacceptable, they can be used only as a basis for new conclusions. Authors are required to cite all previous stages of publication and presentation of their ideas that have culminated in the final work, including conference papers, workshop presentations, etc. 

3.4. Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication. In general, an author should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. An author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.

3.5. Acknowledgement of sources. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

3.6. Authorship. Authorship should be limited to all those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

3.7. Human subjects. If the work includes empirical data that have been received with involvement of certain people, organizations and communities, the author must make sure that this publication will not cause them any harm.

3.8. Disclosure and conflicts of interest. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed as influencing the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.

3.9. Fundamental errors in published works. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of the journal and cooperate with the editor and the publisher to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.

3.10. Permissions. Prior to article submission, authors should receive clear permission to use any content that has not been created by them. The editors are unable to publish any article which has permissions pending. The rights we require are:

•  non-exclusive rights to reproduce the material in the article or book chapter;
•  print and electronic rights;
•  rights to use the material for the life of the work (i.e. there should be no time restrictions on the re-use of material e.g. a one-year license).

When reproducing tables, figures or excerpts (of more than 400 words) from another source, it is expected that:

•  authors obtain the necessary written permission in advance from any third party owners of copyright for the use in print and electronic formats of any of their text, illustrations, graphics, or other material, in their manuscript. Permission must also be cleared for any minor adaptations of any work not created by them;
•  if an author adapts significantly any material, the author must inform the copyright holder of the original work;
•  authors obtain any proof of consent statements;
•  authors must always acknowledge the source in figure captions and refer to the source in the reference list;
•  authors should not assume that any content which is freely available on the web is free to use. Authors should check the website for details of the copyright holder to seek permission for re-use.

4. Duties of the publisher  

4.1. The publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of the journal in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines.

4.2. The publisher should support editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.

4.3. The publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.

4.4. The publisher should provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.