Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Zapiski RMO (Proceedings of RMS) adheres to the principles outlined by COPE – Committee on Publication Ethics (http://publicationethics.org/). The editorial board of the journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher.
Duties of Authors
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. The results of research should be recorded and maintained in a form that allows analysis and review. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical scholarly behavior and is unacceptable. Information obtained by private communication, correspondence or discussions with third parties should not be used without the express written consent of the correspondent source.
Multiple or concurrent publications
Authors should not in general publish articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
Acknowledgment of sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others used in a research project must always be given.
Disclosure of financial support
All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed
Fundamental errors in published work
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor or publisher and cooperate to retract or correct the contribution.
Duties of Editors
The editor of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to thejournal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor is guided bythe policies of the journal's editorialboard and constrained bysuch legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
The editor should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The editor and the editorial staff should not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the publisher.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
The editor must not use unpublished materials in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. The editor should recuse him/herself from considering manuscripts in which he/she has 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.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
The editor should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions
All articles published in the journal are submitted to blind peer review. Peer reviewers should be experts in the scientific topic addressed in the articles they review, and should be selected for their objectivity and scientific knowledge. Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through anonymous communications with the authors may also assist the author in improving the contribution.
The review process may take approximately 1–2 months to be completed. 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 and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should point out relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which he/she has personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must not be 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.