The principles of ethical conduct are divided into 3 parts:
1. Rules applicable to authors
– Principle of scientific reliability: The author is obliged to reliably describe the research work performed and to interpret the results objectively. The works should contain bibliographic information, references and footnotes (allowing identification of data sources and also repetition of studies). Practices of ghostwriting, guest authorship are a manifestation of scientific unreliability and any detected cases should be unmasked, including notification to relevant entities such as institutions employing the author, scientific societies, associations of scientific editors, etc. Authors of the texts accepted for publication are required to submit a declaration regarding the originality of the text and the avoidance of ghostwriting. Presentation and interpretation of data and research results which is non-compliant with the rules of publishing ethics is unacceptable and may result in the withdrawal of the text from print.
– Principle of reliability of sources: The author is obliged to list in the enclosed bibliography the publications which he used in the creation of the text.
– The principle of originality of work: The author may only submit their own original texts for publication. Studies and/or information from other researchers used in the publication should be labelled in such a way as to indicate that this is a quotation or paraphrase. Plagiarism or falsification of data is not permitted.
– Principle of access to data: The author asked to present unprocessed results of research used in the text is obliged to provide access to these data, also after the publication of the work.
– Rules concerning errors in published works: If the author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in their text, they must immediately notify the publisher in order to correct any errors in the next edition or reprint.
2. Publisher rules
– Each submitted article is checked using the anti-plagiarism program.
– Criteria for the acceptance of texts for publication: The publisher decides which texts will be published. When accepting texts for publication, the opinions of reviewers concerning the scientific value of the work, the originality of the approach to the problem, the transparency of the argument are taken into account.
– Controlling ethical standards: The scientific editor should constantly ensure that binding publishing standards and rules of publishing ethics are observed, and should prevent practices that are inconsistent with the adopted standards.
– Principle of scientific reliability: The scientific editor takes care of the scientific reliability of the published works. To preserve the reliability they may make appropriate changes and corrections. In case of suspicion of unfair practices (plagiarism, falsification of research results), they are obliged to decide to withdraw the text from a collective publication.
– Fair play: Submitted texts should only be evaluated on their merits. The authors’ race, sex, religion, origin, citizenship or political opinion do not in any way influence the evaluation of texts.
– Confidentiality principle: The publisher does not disclose any information about the works submitted for publication to unauthorized persons
– Prevention of conflicts of interest: Unpublished texts may not be used by employees of the publishing house or any other person involved in the publishing process without the written consent of the authors. In the event of a conflict of interest, the editors should disclose and describe such a case.
– Withdrawal of publications: The publisher has the right to withdraw an article from publication if:
a. there is evidence of unreliability of test results and/or falsification of data as well as in case of unintentional errors (e.g. methodological errors, calculation errors);
b. the work is plagiarised or violates the rules of publishing ethics.
3. Rules for reviewers
Cooperation with the editorial team: A reviewer reviews work commissioned by the editorial board. In this way they influence the decisions made by the publisher. Reviews influence the final shape and improvement process of the published work.
– Principle of timeliness: The reviewer is obliged to deliver the review within the agreed time limit. If for some reasons (substantive, lack of time, etc.) they are unable to meet the deadline or undertake a review, they should immediately inform the editorial board.
– Confidentiality principle: All reviews and reviewed works are confidential. Disclosure to third parties is not permitted (with the exception of those who take part in the publishing process).
– The principle of maintaining standards of objectivity: The review should be objective. Personal criticism of the author of the work is considered inappropriate. All comments of the reviewer should be duly justified.
– Principle of reliability of sources: The reviewer, if necessary, should indicate appropriate works related to the subject matter of the text but not quoted by the author. They also should indicate and report to the publisher any significant similarities of the reviewed text to other works.
– Principle of counteracting a conflict of interest of a reviewer: A reviewer may not use the reviewed work for his or her personal needs and benefit. They also should not review the text where there may be a conflict of interest with the author.