The journal "Robotics and Technical Cybernetics" editorial activity is based on recommendations of Committee of Publication Ethics, COPE. Therefore it is important to harmonize the ethical principles, the journal does its best to follow ethic standarts accepted by international scientific community and to prevent any deviations of those standarts, and recommends for all parties involved in the publishing process: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher, to follow these principles:
General duties and responsibilities of editors:
- be accountable and to take responsibility for everything they publish;
- make fair and unbiased decisions independent from commercial consideration and ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process;
- adopt editorial policies that encourage maximum transparency and complete, honest reporting, and also for handling editorial conflicts of interest;
- guard the integrity of the published record by issuing corrections and retractions when needed and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct;
- pursue reviewer and editorial misconduct;
- assess critically the ethical conduct of studies in humans and animals;
- inform peer reviewers and authors what is expected of them;
- decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the paper's importance, originality and clarity, and the study's validity and its relevance to the remit of the journal.
Basic principles for peer reviewers:
- only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner;
- respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal;
- not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person's or organization's advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others;
- declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest;
- not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations;
- be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libellous or derogatory personal comments;
- acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavour and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and in a timely manner;
- provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise;
- recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct.
Standarts for authors:
- the research being reported should have been conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and should comply with all relevant legislation.
- researchers should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation.
- researchers should strive to describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that their findings can be confirmed by others.
- researchers should adhere to publication requirements that submitted work is original, is not plagiarised, and has not been published elsewhere.
- authors should take collective responsibility for submitted and published work.
- the authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals' contributions to the work and its reporting.
- funding sources and relevant conflicts of interest should be disclosed.
- authors should alert the editor promptly if they discover an error in any submitted, accepted or published work. Authors should cooperate with editors in issuing corrections or retractions when required.
- authors should represent the work of others accurately in citations and quotations.
- authors should not copy references from other publications if they have not read the cited work.
- authors should follow publishers' requirements that work is not submitted to more than one publication for consideration at the same time.
- authors should inform the editor if they withdraw their work from review, or choose not to respond to reviewer comments after receiving a conditional acceptance.
- authors should respond to reviewers' comments in a professional and timely manner.
- authors should respect publishers' requests for press embargos and should not generally allow their findings to be reported in the press if they have been accepted for publication (but not yet published) in a scholarly publication. Authors and their institutions should liaise and cooperate with publishers to coordinate media activity (e.g. press releases and press conferences) around publication. Press releases should accurately reflect the work and should not include statements that go further than the research findings.
Code of conduct for journal publishers:
- define the relationship between publisher, editor and other parties in a contract;
- respect privacy (for example, for research participants, for authors, for peer reviewers);
- protect intellectual property and copyright;
- foster editorial independence;
- publishers should work with journal editors to set journal policies appropriately and aim to meet those policies;
- communicate journal policies (to authors, readers, peer reviewers);
- review journal policies periodically, particularly with respect to new recommendations from the COPE;
- maintain the integrity of the academic record;
- assist the parties (for example, institutions, grant funders, governing bodies) responsible for the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, facilitate in the resolution of these cases;
- publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions;
- publish content on a timely basis.
