The publishing house of the Aviation Military Academy is guided by the principles set out by the COPE Committee on Publication Ethics, contained in the COPE Code of Conduct

The principles of Publishing Ethics and Good Practices are binding for all publications, publishing series, or scientific journals published by the Aviation Military Academy Publishing House (hereinafter referred to as the "Publishing House" and the "Publisher").

 

1. General principles

1. The publishing house supervises compliance with publishing standards and the principles of publishing ethics and strives to effectively eliminate practices contrary to accepted standards.
2. In order to improve the quality of ethical standards, the Publishing House systematically monitors international publishing ethical standards. In particular, it treats as a reference the standards developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE, https://publicationethics.org ).
3. The Publishing House applies the developed methods of proceeding for individual cases of violations of the principles of publishing ethics. In this respect, it is based on standards developed by COPE.
4. The publishing house provides on its website guidelines for authors and reviewers. The guidelines explain the individual stages of the publishing process and editorial processes and information about the rights and obligations of authors and reviewers. The rights and obligations of authors, reviewers, and the Publisher are also specified in the concluded publishing agreements.
5. The Publishing House ensures the selection of competent reviewers for the works submitted to the publishing house, taking into account their research achievements and qualifications in a given scientific area.
6. The Publishing House has the right to withdraw publication at any stage of publishing, also after its publication, if:
   (a) there is evidence of falsification or distortion of the data in the event of errors, irrespective of the author's intentions, but with the effect of reducing the reliability of the research;
   b) the work bears the hallmarks of plagiarism or significantly violates the principles of publishing ethics.

 

2. Publishing policy

1. Publishing policy remains independent of commercial influence. Publishing decisions are made based on the scientific value of the work, its research timeliness, importance for the further development of scientific research and importance for training and implementation processes.
2. The publishing process is based on ethical assumptions.
3. Procedures are used to ensure high substantive and editorial quality of published works.
4. The Editorial Board evaluates the submitted manuscripts solely on the basis of their substantive value and thematic consistency with the publishing series or journal, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious and political beliefs and affiliation of the authors.
5. The decision to accept the work for printing is made by the Editorial Board of the Publishing House. The rules for qualifying texts for printing are included in the regulations published on the Publisher's website. The body supporting the Editorial Board is the Scientific Council.
6. The publishing house makes sure that the published works are developed at the right level in terms of the legibility of the message.
7. The Publishing House uses all available means to prevent plagiarism, other abuse, and publication of false data.
8. The publishing house eliminates all conflicts of interest between editorial board members, authors and reviewers.
9. The Publisher ensures the confidentiality and security of personal data of authors and any collaborators, in accordance with the GDPR.

3. 
   Obligations of authors

1. The author is obliged to maintain standards of scientific reliability and to comply with the principles of publishing ethics.
2. The author may submit for publication only original works of his own authorship. All references to the works and studies of other authors should be accompanied by appropriate footnotes and should be disclosed in the bibliography.
3. The author is obliged to cooperate with the Editorial Board as part of the review process. In particular, at the request of the Editorial Board, it should provide data on which it bases the results of its research and provide appropriate explanations, depending on the needs.
4. The author should disclose any conflicts of interest that may affect the results of the research or their interpretation.
5. In the case of multi-author texts, authors are obliged to disclose the contributions of individual authors with an indication of what exactly the contribution of a given author to the overall work consisted of (authorship of the concept, conducting empirical research, editing a specific part of the text, etc.).
6. The author notifies the Editorial Board in the event of noticing significant inaccuracies or errors in the published work of his authorship. The Editors, depending on the circumstances, take action in the form of an explanation, correction or other appropriate for the next edition or printout.
7. The scientific editor of a collective work ensures the scientific reliability of the works published in it. It may amend accordingly to that end. In the event of suspicion of conduct inconsistent with the principles of publishing ethics, it signals this issue to the publisher and decides to withdraw the text from publication.
8. The scientific editor of a collective work is obliged to make sure that the authors of individual publications accept their shape after making corrections at the stage of scientific editing.
9. Works submitted for publication should be a record of the author's own contribution to a given field of knowledge and the author's position in relation to the problems raised, taking into account the previous scientific and research achievements of other specialists in a given field.
10. The author submits a statement that the text submitted for publication is an original work, does not violate the rights of third parties, was not published anywhere and was prepared independently. All borrowings, quotations, tables and comments to them used in the text should be accompanied by appropriate footnotes (the provisions in question have been included in the concluded publishing agreement and in the author's statement).
11. The publishing house counteracts the phenomena of ghostwriting and guest authorship, which is included in the publishing agreement.
12. The author is responsible for the fact that all the data in the submitted work are true and do not constitute plagiarism. In the event of errors, he is obliged to revoke false data and correct errors.
13. Copyright is in accordance with the Act – On Copyright and Related Rights. The Author submits a statement on the transfer of copyright to the Publisher and granting the Publisher a license to distribute the article and concludes a publishing agreement).
14. Authors are obliged to participate in the process of peer review of scientific papers.
15. The publishing house publishes on its website guidelines for authors and rules for the qualification of works for publication.

4. 
   Rules for reviewing texts

1. The review procedure is carried out in accordance with the principles of reviewing scientific texts. The rules of reviewing are published on the Publisher's website together with the review sheet.
2. The work can be published after obtaining two positive reviews from independent specialists in a given field of knowledge. The list of reviewers is available on the Publisher's website.
3. Reviewers carry out the review procedure in accordance with the principles of fairness, objectivity, reliability, consistent with their knowledge, without personal and especially offensive comments.
4. Reviewers pay attention to the reliability of the content and the originality and usefulness of the work for science and practice.
5. Reviewers are asked to disclose any plagiarism, shortcomings, manipulations, sources and timeliness of the cited legal provisions and cited data.
6. The author receives reviews for review (after removing information about the identity of reviewers) and is obliged to take into account the comments.
7. For each text, the review is prepared independently by two external reviewers. If the reviewers present conflicting opinions, it is possible to appoint a third reviewer.
8. Reviews are performed in the double-blind review process system, that is, after removing information about the identity of the author. A review form is used.
9. The publishing house ensures the protection of the data of reviewers and authors and the confidentiality of materials submitted to the editorial office during the review period. Reviews are confidential and are only shared with those involved in the editorial process.
10. Reviewers and other persons involved in the publishing process may not use the research contained in unpublished manuscripts without the express consent of their author. Information obtained during the review process is treated as confidential and cannot be for the personal benefit of those involved.
11. The reviewer, in the event of finding the possibility of a conflict of interest, signals this fact to the Editorial Board and returns the text being the subject of the review. The reviewer also has the option of resigning from reviewing the text due to insufficient knowledge.

5. 
   Duties of members of the Scientific Council

1. The members of the Scientific Council are specialists (scientists or practitioners) in the fields that are the area of activity of the Publishing House.
2. Their duties include taking care of the interests and development of the Publishing House and in their activities they make efforts to promote the published publications, show concern for high substantive and editorial quality.
3. The members of the Scientific Council shall be objective and impartial.
4. They care about the substantive and editorial quality of works published in the Publishing House.
5. The tasks of the members of the Scientific Council also include the search for the best authors and reviewers and the appropriate selection of topics of published works.
6. Members of the Scientific Council evaluate pre-submitted texts, assist the Editorial Board in selecting appropriate reviewers, ensure their anonymity, ensure the confidentiality of materials sent to the editorial office in the review and editorial process.
7. They make every effort to detect plagiarism and support authors whose copyrights have been infringed.
8. They try not to allow a conflict of interest, taking care of the high quality of the published works.

 

6. Duties of members of the Editorial Board

1. The members of the Editorial Board work on the basis of high ethical and intellectual standards. They are free from influence and commercial motivations.
2. Editors get acquainted with the submitted articles and make decisions based on their best knowledge, guided by impartiality, objectivity, willingness to contribute to the publication of high-quality materials. They seek to meet the needs of readers and authors, promote freedom of expression, exclude business benefits that may violate ethical norms.
3. They accept articles that meet the most important professional criteria, including those containing innovative theses, extensive and reliable sources.
4. Editors look for the best authors and reviewers, match articles to the needs of readers, respond to the needs of recipients for specific academic issues.
5. The Editorial Board has management systems in place in the event of conflicts of interest between employees, authors, editors and reviewers.

 

7. Publishing ethics and intellectual property

1. The Publishing House takes care of compliance with publishing ethics, constantly monitoring compliance with the Code of Publishing Ethics by authors, reviewers and members of the Editorial Board and the Scientific Council.
2. The publishing house is guided by ethical and intellectual standards.
3. The integrity of scientific records and editorial standards is preserved.
4. In the event of finding inaccuracies or erroneous statements in the published work, the Publishing House publishes explanations, corrections, apologies, depending on the needs and makes every effort to eliminate perceived errors and irregularities, e.g. by withdrawing the work from printing, publishing the second edition corrected in accordance with ethical standards and substantive requirements.
5. The Editorial Board does not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the author, reviewers, advisory editors and the Publisher.
6. When considering copyright infringements, the Editorial Board will use the help of a reliable anti-plagiarism program.