English

Publication Ethics

The given ethical standards are generally accepted for the world scientific community and are fully supported by the Editors of the journal Science and Technology of Pipeline Transport of Oil and Oil Products and its reviewers. Standards are binding on authors.

The Editors and Publisher follow the Code of Ethics of Scientific Publications developed by Committee on Publication Ethics, conduct their activities in accordance with the ethical standards of editors and publishers set out in the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and take into account the experience of authoritative international journals and publishers as well.

The authors, in submitting a manuscript to the Editors, confirm that they are familiar with and consent to the ethical standards of the journal.

Duties of Editor and Publisher
1. Equally favor the submitted articles, evaluate them by the intellectual content and take decision about the article publication solely on the basis of the expert judgment of the independent reviewers and the opinion of the editorial board.
2. Do not approve an article for publication, if there is enough evidence to believe that it is plagiarism.
3. Ensure observance of the right for confidentiality and personal information, to prevent the disclosure of article content without authors consent to anybody except for reviewers, prior to taking a decision on publication.
4. Provide conditions for objective reviewing by ensuring a double blind article review and prevent conflicts of interests between reviewers and authors.
5. Call off an article from review in case of any conflict of interests. Publish corrections or disclaimers in case of conflicts of interests after publication of scientific articles.
6. Take decisive actions in the case if somebody files an ethical claim to the submitted or published scientific article: notification of author, discussion of a claim by the editorial board, publication of corrections (clarifications) and withdrawal of unfair articles.
7. Recommendations for citation of articles are to be based on its scientific significance and are intended to improve the material submitted. Force authors to cite a journal is not valid.
8. Publish corrections, clarifications, refutations or apologies in the cases, when it is required following the article publication due to the detection of major errors or confirmed facts of inappropriate scientific and research behavior.
9. Prevent deliberate violation of ethical policy of the Editor and Publisher; take reasonable actions to prevent violation of ethical standards by authors and reviewers.

Duties of Authors
1. Be honest in collecting and interpreting scientific data.
2. By submitting an article to the journal, the author confirms that it has not been published previously in public media, nor is it before another journal for consideration. When the article is approved, the author guarantees, that it will not be republished in any edition.
3. 3. The author undertakes to provide accurate and reliable data in the article and bear collective responsibility for the compliance of scientific article to ethical and legal standards as well as comply with the requirements on the inadmissible disclosure of financial information or any other information causing conflict of interests.
4. 4. All authors shall make a significant contribution to the research, the results of which are sent for publication to the journal. It is inadmissible as authors, to mention other parties, who are unrelated to the research. If a party made a contribution to the research work, but was not mentioned as an author, then it shall be referenced in the acknowledgement section.
5. Authors shall recognize the works of other researchers related to the article theme and provide references to all publications, which influenced and were used in the research work. The reference works list shall be provided by the authors. The citations and references to other works shall be accurate and correctly provided.
6. The methodology published in scientific article, research and calculation results shall be presented in an easily accessible manner, clear and unambiguous in order to ensure the possibility of citation and further confirmation by other researchers.
7. Scientific article shall not contain defamatory materials, personal criticism of other scientists. Criticism of other researchers works can be considered as justified.
8. The authors shall answer the questions of reviewers in the shortest possible time and in a professional manner. Also, notify the editorial board in case, if they refuse to have their works reviewed or prefer not to respond to reviewers comments.
9. Authors shall specify all sources of research funding in the article, declare possible conflict of interest.
10. Notify the Editor in case of finding errors or inaccuracies in a work submitted for publication, and take appropriate measures for rectification. The authors undertake to provide rebuttals or corrections if errors or inaccuracies are found in a previously published article.

Duties of Reviewers
1. Consider their work on an article as confidential. In case if the reviewer consults with colleagues on the matter of reviewed material, he/she shall inform the editorial board about it.
2. Accept and review only those articles, which comply with the reviewers activity field and knowledge, and which can be reviewed in allotted time.
3. Prevent the content of the review to be influenced by the origin of the article, nationality, religious affiliation, political or other views of its authors, administrative relations or commercial considerations.
4. Guarantee confidentiality of any unpublished data, its interpretation or other information, contained in the article. Do not use information contained in the peer- reviewed work, in reviewers researches, for self-interest or the interests of other persons or organizations, to harm others or discredit them.
5. Give objective review of an article, give well-founded conclusions, comments and recommendations. Express their judgments on the article in such a way that authors and editors can understand the considerations on which the assessment is based.
6. Return the article to the Editor without review if there is a conflict of interest. In particular, the reviewer shall not review articles by a person with whom the reviewer is in close personal or professional relations if there may be reasonable doubt that these relations may affect the reviewer's opinion.
7. Report detected cases of borrowed material in the peer-reviewed article or falsified information within your knowledge.
8. Report all possible cases of conflict of interests.
9. Do not keep copies and do not copy peer-reviewed materials in any form in order to avoid copyright infringement.

Subscription
Archive