The policy of ethical standards in the publication and malpractice statement of the scientific journal "PNRPU Mechanics Bulletin"

1. GENERAL TERMS

1.1. This policy sets standards of ethical behavior for the parties involved in the publication process: authors, editorial board, reviewer, and publisher. The following standards are based on generally accepted and existing policies of Journal and Publisher.

1.2. Federal State Budgeted Education Institution for Higher Professional Education “Perm National Research Polytechnic University”, as the founder and editor of the scientific journal "PNRPU Mechanics Bulletin", assumes obligations to control all stages of the publication process of articles and recognizes its ethical and other obligations related to the publication of articles.

2. ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR AUTHORS OF PUBLICATIONS

2.1. Standard for access to the source research data and its storage
The author is obliged to present the source materials (data) of the research at the request of the editorial board, if the article does not show the original data, and must be prepared to provide public access to them. The author should store this data in a reasonable time after the publication to allow their reproduction and verification.

2.2. Standard for originality (inadmissibility of plagiarism)
The author presents the article containing the results of original research to the editorial board for reviewing. If the author of the article used or includes an article excerpts from others works (citations), such use must be properly executed by specifying the original source in the references to the article. Plagiarism in any form is unethical and unacceptable behavior author.

2.3. Standard for semelincident publication
The author presents to the editorial board manuscript, unpublished, and not given to the editorial board of any other journal. The manuscript is submitted simultaneously in several journals is unethical and unacceptable. The same applies to translation article into a foreign language.

2.4. Standard for sources confirmation
The author undertakes to specify the correct scientific and other sources that were used in the research and which have had a significant impact on the results of a research in the references. The information obtained from informal (private) sources should not be used when making a scientific article.

2.5. Standard for manuscript authorships
All persons who have made significant contributions to the research should be listed as co-authors of the article. The list of authors should be limited to only those persons.
The author, who presents a manuscript to the editorial board, ensures that  it have all co-authors, and they all have seen and approved the final manuscript and agree to its submission to the editorial board of the scientific journal "PNRPU Mechanics Bulletin" for publication.

2.6. Conflict of interest policy
Authors must disclose conflicts of interest that may affect the evaluation and interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the article (grants, state programs, projects, etc.) should be disclosed and necessarily listed in the manuscript.

2.7. Standard for error correction in the published literature
If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the article already published, the author immediately notifies the editorial board and help it in correcting the error. If the editorial board or third parties recognize the error in the article, the author is obliged to immediately correct the error or to provide evidence of its absence.

3. ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR EDITORIAL BOARD

3.1. Standard for decision to publish articles
The editorial board makes a decision on which of submitted articles, should to be published, based on the results of test for the requirements and the results of peer review. When making the decision to publish the manuscript editorial board is guided by the policy of ethical standards and does not permit the publication of articles with signs of libel, slander, plagiarism, copyright violations or conflict of interest. The final decision on publication of the article or to its refuse accepted by the editor-in-chief of the journal.

3.2. Standard for all authors equality
Editorial board evaluates submitted manuscripts regardless of race, gender, nationality, ethnic origin, citizenship, occupation, affiliation and residence, as well as its political, philosophical, religious or other views.

3.3. Privacy standards
Editorial board will not disclose information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the author, the reviewer (with single-blind review), and if necessary - the publisher.

3.4. Conflict of interest policy
Editorial board ensures that the refused manuscripts will not be used in another study of the editorial staff, without the written agreement of the author. The Editorial board will refuse to review manuscripts, if it is no competitive relationship with the author or organization associated with the results of the study, or if there is a conflict of interest. Editors shall require all participants in the publication process the disclosure of competing interests.

3.5. Standard for the author unethical behavior claims consideration
Editorial board reviews promptly each claim of unethical behavior of manuscript’s authors regardless of the time of receipt. Editors will take appropriate reasonable steps in respect of such claims. If the arguments of the claims are true, then the Editorial board right to refuse publication of the article, to cease further cooperation with the author, to publish a rebuttal, and to take other necessary steps to prevent further unethical conduct by the person.

4. ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR REVIEWERS

4.1. Standard for reviewer contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review of the manuscript provided by the reviewer promotes the adoption of editorial decisions, and helps the author to improve the manuscript. The decisions to accept the manuscript for publication, to returned the manuscript for revision, or rejection of the publication are accepted by the editorial board based on peer review results.

4.2. Standard for reviewing deadlines
The reviewer must provide a review in time for a date specified by Editorial board. If the review and preparation of the manuscript reviews on these dates is not possible, then the reviewer should notify the Editor.

4.3. Standard for privacy by the reviewer
Manuscript submitted for review should be treated as a confidential document, regardless of the form of peer-review chosen by the journal. The reviewer may show it or discuss it with others only with the agreement of the editor-in-chief.

4.4. Standard for review objective
The reviewer shall carry out peer review of the manuscript objectively. Reviewer's personal criticism is not valid. All reviewer conclusions should be strictly based and supplied with references to authoritative sources.

4.5. Standard for sources confirmation
Reviewers should indicate the presence of sources that have influenced the results of the research, but were not given by the author. The reviewer must pay attention to the substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and the other previously published work, which is known reviewer.

4.6. Conflict of interest policy
The reviewer must not use the materials in an unpublished manuscript for his own researches without the written agreement of the author. The reviewer must refrain from reviewing the manuscript, in connection with which he has a conflict of interest because of the competitive, cooperative or other relationship with the authors or organizations related to the manuscript.