Publication ethics

The collection of scientific papers “Fundamental and applied problems of ferrous metallurgy” adheres to recognized publishing ethics standards.
The editors adhere to the principles declared by the  Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and follow the practices of the world’s leading journals and publishers.

Ethical principles of the Editors and the Editorial Board

All submitted for publication materials are carefully selected and reviewed.
The editor reserves the right to reject or return the article to the authors for revision.
The editor is responsible for accepting or rejecting the manuscript. The editor takes into account the recommendation of the reviewer. However, the manuscript may be rejected without review if the editor considers that the materials submitted for publication do not meet the journal’s profile.
When deciding on publication, the editor is guided by the reliability of the submitted materials, their scientific originality and practical value. In addition, the editor is guided by the editorial policy and the Editorial Board’s decisions, limited by the current legal norms related to defamation, copyright and plagiarism.
The editor evaluates the intellectual content of the manuscripts regardless of the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, citizenship or political preferences.
The editor and the Editorial Board are obliged not to divulge the information about submitted manuscripts to anyone except for persons directly involved in their consideration.
The editor must not use unpublished materials of the submitted manuscript in his research without the written agreement of the author(s). Confidential information or ideas must not be disclosed by the editor or used by him for personal purposes.
The editor must not participate in reviewing in case of a conflict of interest due to the existence of competitive relations, joint activities or other interactions and relations with any of the authors.
The editor must not allow information to be published if there is sufficient reason to believe that it is plagiarized.

 

Ethical principles of the authors

Authors who are submitting manuscripts for publication have to provide credible research results. Patently false or falsified claims are not acceptable. The used data must not contain errors. The research and its results have to contain enough information for the possibility of their reproduction. False statements are considered unethical behaviour and unacceptable.
Authors should ensure that the research results presented in the submitted manuscript are completely original. Borrowings in the manuscript have to be made with a mandatory indication of authorship and appropriate references or citations. All forms of plagiarism and excessive borrowing are unacceptable.
Authors should not submit a manuscript under consideration of another journal, as well as an article or research results that have already been published.
Authors should cite publications that have had a decisive influence on the substance of their research and publications that are important for its understanding.
The authors should inform the editor about related articles presented for publication in other journals. They should submit copies of those articles to the editor and indicate their relationship to the manuscript.
In the manuscript, it is necessary to define the contribution of all persons who influenced the course of the research. Co-authors of the manuscript must be all persons who made a significant scientific contribution to the manuscript and who share responsibility for the obtained results. Other contributions should be noted in the manuscript’s acknowledgements section. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that only those persons who meet the authorship criteria are included in the list of authors. The corresponding author assumes responsibility for the other authors’ consent for the manuscript’s publication.
Information obtained in private must not be used or disclosed without the written permission of the original source, as well as information that violates the interests of a third party.
Authors have to notify the editor of any potential conflict of interest.

 

Ethical principles of reviewers

The reviewer has to give an objective and reasoned assessment of the presented research results. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
A manuscript received for review has to be treated as a confidential document, which cannot be transferred for review or discussion to a third party.
Suppose a reviewer considers that they do not have sufficient qualifications to evaluate the manuscript. In that case, they should inform the editor with a request to exclude them from the process of reviewing the manuscript.
The reviewer should not participate in reviewing in the event of a conflict of interest due to the existence of competitive relations, joint activities or other interactions and relations with any of the manuscript’s authors.
Reviewers must adequately explain and justify their judgments so that the editor and the authors can understand their comments. Any statement that an observation, conclusion, or argument has been previously published must be accompanied by an appropriate reference.
The reviewer should note any cases of insufficient citation that are directly related to the manuscript under review; at the same time, it should be taken into account that comments on insufficient citation of the reviewer’s research may appear biased. The reviewer should bring to the editor’s attention any significant similarity between the manuscript and other published articles or any manuscript concurrently submitted to another journal.
The reviewer has to provide a review on time.
The reviewer must not use unpublished data obtained from the manuscripts under consideration for personal purposes without the written consent of the author(s) of the manuscript.

 

Actions in case of violation of publication ethics

If there is a suspicion that the reviewer has appropriated the ideas or data of the manuscript’s authors

According to the algorithm of COPE actions “What to do if you suspect a reviewer has appropriated an author’s idea or data“, this case can be considered when providing documentary evidence from the author and/or other sources, for example, a publication, an abstract, a report, a copy of slides, grant application. After examining the evidence (or contacting a specialist with appropriate qualifications for this) and deciding on whether the author’s and/or other sources’ statements are justified.

  • If the allegation is proven, an investigation will be requested against the reviewer and the institution they are an employee.
  • It will be checked for connections between the accuser and the named reviewer, such as personal relationships or other conflicts of interest.
  • If the reviewer’s guilt is proven, they will be permanently suspended from reviewing articles in “Fundamental and applied problems of ferrous metallurgy”.
  • Suppose the borrowed idea or data has been published in another source. In that case, the editorial board of the collection will request the relevant publication sources to accept the policy of retraction of the published material.

If there are suspicions of ethical problems with the submitted manuscript

According to the COPE action algorithm “What to do if you suspect an ethical problem

  • The corresponding author will be requested to provide relevant details (e.g. copies of informed consent documents).
  • If the relevant documents are not provided:
    – the manuscript will be rejected, and it will not be published in the collection;
    – the case will be transferred for investigation to the institution whose employees are the manuscript’s authors.