The journal’s publication ethics abides by the standards of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics)
Each paper offered for publication in the journal is initially assessed by an editor and is then reviewed by independent reviewer who is not in a conflict of interest with the author and does not come from the same institution.
Before a submitted manuscript is put forward for peer review, an editor may refuse it for failing to meet the requisite formal criteria and request that it is revised to comply with the Guidelines for Authors.
Based on the reviewer’s comments, the manuscript is either accepted for publication, returned to the author for revision, or rejected. In the case of substantial revisions to the text, another round of the review process can follow.
The typical duration of the review process is 8 weeks.
The author is informed of the results of the review process in the shortest time possible.
In the event that the author has objections to the reviewers’ comments, they may contact the Editorial Office and address their opinion to it. This opinion will be further discussed by the editorial board of the journal, and the reviewers will also be informed of it.
The final decision regarding the publication of the text lies with the Editorial Board of the journal.
The authors guarantee the originality of their works. Any use of works by other authors must be accompanied by an accurate citation of the source.
The authors should ensure that the text has not been offered simultaneously to another periodical or that the same text has not been published elsewhere. Furthermore, they guarantee that their contribution is not plagiarism or redundancy.
In the event that the author discovers one or more significant errors or inaccuracies in his texts, citations, or bibliographic references of their paper after submitting the manuscript to the Editorial Office, they are obliged to report this to the Editorial Office without delay and to cooperate in the rectification.
Authors hold the copyright to their text.
Authors cannot remain anonymous to the Editorial Office. Along with the manuscript of their paper, they provide their contact details for further communication with the Editorial Office.
Authors are required to follow The Guidelines for Authors established by the editorial board on the journal’s website, and to adhere to all formal requirements listed here, including the rules for citing sources.
It is the authors’ duty to respond to the reviewers’ comments and observations and to make the proposed adjustments based on these comments. If the author does not consider the reviewers’ recommendations to be justified, they have the right to address their opinion to the executive editor, whose duty it is to inform the reviewers and the Editorial Board of his opinion.
The authors are obliged to provide sources for each image they intend to publish as part of the paper. In the event that they do not have the rights to publish these images, they are required to inform the Editorial Office in advance.
The authors are obliged to disclose any grant, other support or other funding that made the article possible.
Reviewers abide by the editorial guidelines and pay particular attention to the deadlines set by the Editorial Office. If a reviewer knows that they will not be able to submit the review by the specified deadline, they must promptly inform the Editorial Office.
The reviewer who does not feel competent to assess the article on the given topic will notify the Editorial Office of this fact as soon as possible.
Reviewers must maintain objectivity and assess texts without any bias. All their opinions and comments must be supported by clearly expressed views with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate
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. If any such conflicts arise, they must notify the journal’s Editorial Office thereof at once and withdraw from the review.
Reviewers are obliged to notify the editors of suspicion of plagiarism or other unethical publishing procedures in the reviewed paper.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
Submitted reviewed papers are confidential and must be treated as such. The reviewer must not further distribute the provided text, provide it to other persons or misuse the information or knowledge contained therein for personal or other purposes.
The reviewer’s factual and general comments should be clearly stated in the review or in the manuscript of the text. The conclusion of the review should be a clear statement under what conditions and whether the reviewer recommends the text for publication.
The editors and the editorial board are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published regarding the quality of the submissions.
The editors and the editorial board evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to gender, race, sexual or political orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin or citizenship of authors.
The editors should be guided by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding copyright infringement and/or plagiarism or libels.
The Editorial Office remains objective and unbiased, treats authors’ submissions as confidential and must not share them with any other party except the reviewers, potential reviewers, publisher and members of the Editorial Board.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper must not be used in an editor’s own research or in any other way without the express written consent of the author.