Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
These guidelines are based on the Publishing ethics resource kit (PERK): http://www.elsevier.com/editors/perk and Cope's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors: http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines.
COPYRIGHT
- By submitting a paper the author understands that its copyright is transferred to CTU in Prague. CTU in Prague may publish it at their discretion and the author may not resubmit it anywhere else, and that includes other publications.
ATTENDANCE/REGISTRATION
- By submitting a paper the author pledges that at least one of the paper's authors will come, present, and register the paper in the conference.
PEER REVIEW
- All submitted papers are subject to strict peer-review process by at least two international reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper.
- The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability and language.
- The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
- If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
- Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
- Articles may be rejected without review if they are obviously not suitable for publication.
- The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
DUTIES OF AUTHORS
Reporting standards
- Authors of contributions and studies research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance.
- A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Originality and plagiarism
- The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
- Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Duplicate publication
- Articles must not contain any results that have been reported in any publikation in any form.
- Autors should inform editors of any potential duplicate publications.
Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
- Authors should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one publication.
- Submitting the same manuscript to more than one publishing concurrently constitutes unethical behaviour and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of sources
- Autors must always give proper acknowledgment of the work of others and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the their contribution.
- Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, must not be used written permission from the source.
Authorship of the paper
- Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study
- All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for it.
- People who provide financial assistance and technical support or were committee members could be acknowledged but not recognized as authors.
Disclosure
- All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental errors in published works
- When authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their own contribution work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor and cooperate with him/her to correct the paper.
DUTIES OF EDITORS
Publication decisions
- The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for decision which contribution should be published.
- The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers must always drive such decisions.
- Editors may confer with other editors in making his decision.
Fair play
- Editors should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality
- Editors must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
- Unpublished materials must not be used in editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
- Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
- Editors should recluse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
- Every act of unethical publishing behaviour must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.
DUTIES OF REVIEWERS
Contribution to editorial decisions
- Peer review assists the publisher in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the experts form the scientific board ant the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Promptness
- Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality
- Manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents and are reviewed by anonymous staff.
- They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of objectivity
- Reviews should be conducted objectively.
- Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
- Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the paper.
• Acknowledgement of sources
- Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
- Any statement as an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.
- A reviewer should also call to the publisher's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
• Disclosure and conflict of interest
- Unpublished materials must not be used in reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
- Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
MALPRACTICE STATEMENT
- Academic misconduct in any form will not be tolerated.
- In case of suspected misconduct a panel will be formed to evaluate the assertion.
- If the assertion is supported by evidence, the contribution will be rejected and all authors and their affiliations will be informed.
- In case that the paper has already been published misconduct will be made public.
- All appeals regarding decisions have to go through the Editor-in-Chief.