The code of conduct of the Scientific Papers of the Siedlce University of Natural Sciences and Humanities in Series: Administration and Management shall follow the guidelines of COPE – the Committee on Publication Ethics (http://publicationethics.org/).
1. Indicating the authorship of the paper
The authorship shall be limited to the people who substantially contributed to the creation of the paper, namely to the concept and accomplishment of research, and the interpretation of research results.
The Journal’s editorial board shall follow the rules preventing the cases of ghostwriting and guest authorship, which are recognised as examples of scientific unreliability. Authors shall define the participation of each of the people involved in the preparation of the text. To that end, they shall submit a statement and declaration that are available on the Journal website.
2. Disclosure and conflict of interest
Authors’ shall disclose the sources of finance for their projects in the paper, as well as the contribution made by science and research institutions, foundations, associations and other entities. They shall also indicate any potential sources of conflict of interest.
3. Standards for text preparation
Papers submitted to the Journal shall be original works that do not violate any third party’s rights. They shall be papers that have not been published or submitted for publication in a different publishing house yet. The author shall not publish materials describing the same research in more than one journal or more than one original publication. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal at the same time shall be forbidden. It shall be found unethical to submit a scientific article that is a translation of an already published text or a text that has been submitted for publication in a different journal.
4. Access to and storage of data
The author shall be prepared to make unprocessed data referring to the submitted article available at a request. The author shall keep the data for a year after the publication.
5. Errors found after submitting the text
The author shall immediately inform the editorial board if s/he finds an error or inconsistency in the already submitted paper.
6. Originality and plagiarism
The author shall submit only an original paper to the editorial board. S/he shall exercise due diligence in order to make sure that the surnames of authors referred to in the text are cited and listed correctly. Plagiarism shall be treated as an unethical and unacceptable behaviour.
The cases of violating the code of ethics listed hereinabove shall be the reasons for rejecting papers.
EDITORIAL BOARD’S DUTIES
1. Responsibility for published texts
The editorial board shall follow the currently binding law on defamation, violation of copyright and plagiarism.
The board shall be responsible for the decisions made in relation to the submitted papers. Publications shall be subject to thematic editor’s evaluation, and then handed over to the chief editor. Should an article meet substantive requirements and be within the scope of the Journal, the chief editor shall decide to send it to reviewers. The decision about publishing the paper shall be also subject to the risk of violating copyright, plagiarism, autoplagiarism and doubts about the authorship or co-authorship of the paper.
The decision about accepting or rejecting the paper for publication shall be mainly subject to the originality of the paper, its scientific quality and consistency with the thematic scope of the Journal. The decision shall in no way be subject to the author’s background, nationality, ethnicity, political views, sex, race or faith.
The editorial board shall not make authors’ data available to reviewers, and reviewers’ data to authors. The information obtained in the publication process and also the rejected articles or rejected parts thereof shall not be used in own research by members of the editorial board or reviewers without author’s explicit consent.
4. Prevention of conflict of interest
The editorial board shall not appoint people who have a reporting relationship with authors of the texts or have any other direct personal relationship with them as reviewers.
5. Anti-plagiarism policy
Should it be confirmed that a text, statements, research results or data have been illegally used, the author of the submitted paper shall be informed in writing that his/her paper has been rejected. Should the author fail to respond to the communication, the institution with which the author is affiliated shall be informed.
In the case of an autoplagiarism, when the author uses in the paper submitted for publication passages from his/her own text that has already been published, the editorial board shall inform the author about rejecting his/her paper due to a lack of originality of the analyses made.
The reviewer shall immediately inform the editorial board if s/he is not able to review the paper at all or within the set deadline.
The reviews shall be made objectively, in compliance with ethical standards and on the basis of scientific arguments. Their purpose shall be to improve the scientific value of the texts. Personal criticism against the author shall be inadmissible.
All papers under review shall be treated as confidential documents. They shall not be shown to third parties or discussed with anyone outside of the editorial board. Author's work shall not be used by reviewers to gain personal advantage.
All reviews shall be made anonymously. The editorial board shall not make authors’ data available to reviewers.
5. Conflict of interest
Reviewers shall not review papers in the case of which there can be a conflict of interest resulting from a relationship of either professional or personal nature with the author, company or institution.
6. Verification of paper originality
The reviewer shall inform the editorial assistant of the Journal about the cases of violating ethical standards by the author of the text. It shall especially refer to a striking similarity or partial similarity of the wording of the reviewed paper with any other, already published work that the reviewer is aware of.