OBRABOTKA METALLOV

METAL WORKING AND MATERIAL SCIENCE
Print ISSN: 1994-6309    Online ISSN: 2541-819X
English | Русский

Recent issue
Vol. 21, No 3 July – September 2019

Declaration of Ethics

   Publication of a paper in the peer-reviewed journal “Obrabotka Metallov / Metal Working and Material Science” is a continuous improvement of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the authors work quality.

   It is important to coordinate the standards of expected ethical conduct of all parties, involved in the publishing process: author, editor, reviewer and publisher.


 

Plagiarism detection

"Obrabotka metallov (tekhnologiya, oborudovanie, instrumenty)" = " Metal Working and Material Science " use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.


 

Authors’ duties

   Reporting standards
   Authors should to submit reliable results of the original study, as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying research data should be clearly stated in the paper. Paper should be sufficiently detailed and contain the necessary links for the recurrence other work done. Knowingly false or erroneous statements are unacceptable and have unethical behavior.

   Data access and storage
   Authors may be asked to provide the raw data associated with the paper for the editorial review, and authors should be prepared to keep specific data within a reasonable period after its publication.

   Originality and plagiarism
   Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and, if the authors have used the work/s of others, that they are properly cited or formalized the references. Plagiarism have many forms, from “fobbing off” another's paper as the paper of its own to copying or paraphrasing significant portions of other paper of the another author (without attribution), to claim to the results of research work conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical and unacceptable behavior of publication.

   Multiple , overlapping and simultaneous publication
   Typically, the author should not publish paper, which basically describes the same study in more than one primary or journal publication. Paper submission simultaneously in more than one journal is unethical and unacceptable behavior. Typically, the author should not submit for consideration in another journal paper that has already been published.

   Sources confirmation
   Work of other authors should always be properly recognized. Authors should apply citation of the publications that have influenced the determination of the nature of the submitted work. Information, obtained privately, in conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties, should not be used or represented without the express written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential work, such as reviewing manuscripts or grant applications, should not be used without the express written permission of the author involved in these publications.

   Authorship of the work
   Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the present study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. If there are those who participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be thanked, or they should be listed as sponsors. The author with whom correspondence is conducted, should ensure that the names of all relevant collaborators are included in the paper and one of those who is not a co-author, is not included in it, and that all co-authors have read and approved the final version of the paper, and gave their consent to its presentation for publication.

   Fundamental errors in the published papers
   When the author discovers a significant mistake or inaccuracy in his/her published work, he/she should immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and assist the editor in the withdrawal or correction of the paper. If the editor or publisher learns from a third party that the published work contains a significant mistake, the author is obliged to immediately withdraw or correct a paper or submit proof of the correctness editor original paper.

Editors duties

   Publishing solutions
   Editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for making a decision: which of the papers submitted to the journal should be published. Checking the work under consideration and its importance for researchers and readers should always be the basis of such decisions. The editor can be guided by the policy of the Editorial Board, taking into account the existing legislation on defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

   Fair play
  The editor should evaluate manuscripts for its scientific content, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, nationality and political views of the authors.

   Privacy
   Editor and all editorial staff should not disclose any information about the assignment of work to anyone except the respective author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers and, if necessary, the publisher.

   Information disclosure and conflict of interest
   Unpublished information, submitted in the manuscript, should not be used in your own research, without the written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas, obtained during the review process, should be maintained as confidential and shall not be used for personal purposes. Editors should refuse to consider (i.e. should ask another member of the editorial board of review and consider exercise) the manuscripts, in respect of which they have a conflict of interest as a result of competitive relations, collaborative relationships or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or (possibly) institutions related papers. Editors should require all participants to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If necessary, other appropriate measures should be taken, for example, publishing a refutation or a statement of concern. Unrefereed journal section should be clearly labeled.

   Participation and cooperation in resolving disputes
   The editor should take reasonable response when filing ethical complaints regarding submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher. Such measures typically include an author link to the manuscripts or papers, and due consideration of a complaint or claim, but may also include further contacts with relevant institutions and research institutions, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other materials that may be relevant to the issue. Each message is a publication of the fact of unethical behavior should be considered, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Reviewers duties

   Participation in the editorial decisions
   Reviewing helps the editor to make editorial decisions and through online communication with the author can help the author to improve his work.

   Timeliness
   Any chosen reviewer, who believes that his skills insufficient to review the research, presented in the manuscript, or who knows that it will be impossible to make a review in time, should notify the editor and refuse to participate in the review process.

   Privacy
   All manuscripts received for review should be treated as confidential documents. It should not be shown or discussed with others, except with the permission of the editor.

   Standards of objectivity
   Reviews should be objective. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers are required to express their views clearly and convincingly.

   Sources confirmation
   Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any assertion that the findings, conclusions or argument has been presented previously, should be formalized as a relevant citation. The reviewer should also pay attention to any editor substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other paper that he personally knows.

   Disclosure and conflict of interest
   Unpublished submissions filed in the manuscript should not be used in the reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained during the review process should be maintained as confidential and should not be used for personal purposes. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts, for which they have a conflict of interest as a result of competitive relations, collaborative relationships or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions related papers.

 


Based on the Elsevier recommendations and guide on best practices COPE (COPE - Committee on Publication Ethics, the ethics committee of publications)