The policy of ethical standards in the publication and malpractice statement of the scientific journal "PNRPU Bulletin. Chemical Technology and Biotechnology"

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 the Journal and Publisher.

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

 

2. ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR AUTHORS OF PUBLICATIONS

2.1. Standard for access to the source research data and its storage

An 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. An author should store this data in reasonable time after the publication to allow its reproduction and verification.

2.2. Standard for originality (inadmissibility of plagiarism)

An author presents a paper containing the results of original research to the Editorial board for reviewing. If an author of the article used or included a paper excerpts from others works (citations), such use must be properly executed by specifying the original source in the references to the paper. Plagiarism in any form is unethical and unacceptable for an author.
2.3. Standard for one-time publication

The author provides to the editorial board with the manuscript which has not been published before and given to the editorial board of any other journal. A manuscript which is submitted simultaneously in several journals is unethical and unacceptable. The same applies to the translation of a paper into a foreign language.

2.4. Standard for sources confirmation

An 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 paper.

2.5. Standard for manuscript authorships

All persons who have made significant contributions to the research should be listed as co-authors of the paper. The list of authors should be limited to only those persons. The author who presents a manuscript to the editorial board ensures that he specified 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 Bulletin.Chemical Technology and Biotechnology" for publication.

2.6. Conflict of interests policy

Authors must disclose conflicts of interests that may affect the evaluation and interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the paper (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 an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the paper already published, the author is to immediately notify the editorial board and help it in correcting the error. If the editorial board or third parties recognize the error in the paper, 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 papers

The editorial board decides which submitted papers should 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, the editorial board is guided by the policy of ethical standards and does not permit the publication of papers with signs of libel, slander, plagiarism, copyright violations or conflict of interests. The final decision on publication of the paper or to its refusal is taken by the editor-in-chief of the journal.

3.2. Standard for all authors equality

The 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

The editorial board will not disclose information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the author, the reviewer (with single-blind review) the publisher, if necessary.

3.4. Conflict of interests policy by the editorial board

The editorial board ensures that the refused manuscripts will not be used in another study of the editorial staff without a written consent of the author. The editorial board will refuse to review manuscripts, if they have no competitive relationship with the author or organization associated with the results of the study, or if there is a conflict of interests. The editors shall require all participants in the publication process of the disclosure of competing interests.

3.5. Standard for the author unethical behavior claims consideration

The editorial board promptly reviews each claim of unethical behavior of author’s manuscript regardless of the time of receipt. Editors are to take appropriate reasonable steps in respect with such claims. If the arguments of the claims are true, then the editorial board has the right to refuse from the paper publication, cease further cooperation with the author, publish a rebuttal and 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 effects the editorial decisions and helps the author to improve the manuscript. The decisions on accepting the manuscript for publication, returning the manuscript for revision or rejecting 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 the editorial board. If the review and preparation of the manuscript reviews on these dates are not possible, then the reviewer should notify the Editor.

4.3. Standard for privacy by the reviewer

A 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 consent of the editor-in-chief.

4.4. Standard for review objectivity

The reviewer shall carry out peer review of the manuscript objectively. Reviewer's personal criticism is not acceptable. 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 to the reviewer.

4.6. Conflict of interests policy disclosure

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