The Ethics of Scientific Publications of the Scientific and Technical Journal “Rocket-Space Device Engineering and Information Systems”

The editorial ethics of the scientific and technical journal “Rocket-Space Device Engineering and Information Systems” is based on the Code of ethics of scientific publications developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The ethics of scientific publications is a system of norms of professional behavior in relations between authors, reviewers, editors, publishers and readers in the process of creation, dissemination and use of scientific publications.

The Authors’ Ethics of Scientific Publications

An author (or authors) when submitting materials to the scientific and technical journal “Rocket-Space Device Engineering and Information Systems” is aware that bears personal responsibility for novelty and reliability of results of the scientific research that involves the following principles:

  • The authors of the article should provide reliable results of the conducted research. Wrong or fabricated statements are unacceptable.
  • Authors should ensure that the results of a study described in a submitted manuscript are completely original. The borrowed fragments or statements should be arranged with the obligatory indication of the author and the source. Excessive borrowing and plagiarism in any form, including unregistered quotes, paraphrasing or assignment of rights to the results of other research are unethical and unacceptable.
  • It is necessary to recognize the contribution of all persons somehow influenced the course of the study; in particular, an article should include references to works that mattered in the research.
  • Authors should not submit a manuscript, which has been sent to another journal and is under consideration, as well as an article already published in another journal.
  • If a submitted article has been partially published in another periodical or book, which possess the copyright to this publication, the authors are responsible for the timely receipt of appropriate permission for the new publication.
  • Coauthors should include all those who have made a significant contribution to the study. Among the coauthors should not be all those who have not participated in the study.
  • If an author discovers significant errors or inaccuracy in the article at the stage of its consideration or after its publication, he should notify, as soon as possible, the Editor of the journal.
  • A submitted paper should include a written consent for its publication in the form of authors’ signatures on the copy of the article in printed and/or electronic form from all authors. The written consent of the authors is the automatic determination of whether the author or authors have a copyright on the material to be published.
  • The authors should respect the work of the Editorial Board and reviewers, as well as eliminate the above drawbacks or explain them with reason.

The Ethics of Reviewing Scientific Publications

A reviewer provides a scientific expertise of a copyright material; therefore, he should have an unbiased approach basing on the following principles:

  • A manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document, which cannot be transmitted for familiarization or discussion to third parties, without authority from the Editorial Staff.
  • A reviewer should give an objective and reasoned evaluation about the results of the study. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
  • A reviewer who does not possess, in his opinion, a sufficient qualification to assess the manuscript, or cannot be objective, for example, in the case of a conflict of interest with the author or organization, should inform the Editor-in-Chief with a request to be excluded from the reviewing process of this manuscript.
  • Unpublished data obtained from the submitted manuscript should not be used by the reviewer for personal use.
  • The compliance of the submitted article to the journal requirements on the subject and scope is analyzed; scientific and technical novelty, literacy and clarity of presentation, persuasiveness of the experimental data, and the representativeness of the reference list are evaluated in the review.
  • The result of the review process by the reviewer is the conclusion about possibility of its publication – in present form, with revisions, after a basic processing (reconsideration) or about its rejection. This conclusion is approved by the Editorial Staff and/or the Editorial Board.
  • All reviewers should identify cases of plagiarism and other unethical actions. In addition, the reviewers are responsible for giving the constructive feedback to the authors of the articles and Editorial Staff of the journal.

The Ethics of Editing Scientific Publications

In its activity, the Editorial Board of the journal is responsible for publishing the works of the authors, which imposes the need to adhere to the following fundamental principles:

  • When taking a decision about publication, the Editorial Board is guided by the reliability of the given data and scientific importance of the work being studied.
  • Information or ideas obtained while editing and related to possible benefits should be kept confidential and not used for the purpose of personal gain.
  • The Editorial Board takes a decision about the publication of materials based on the following main criteria:
    • compliance of the manuscript to the journal themes;
    • relevance, novelty and scientific significance of the submitted article;
    • reliability of results and completeness of conclusions. The quality of the research and its relevance are the basis for the decision about publication;
    • not allow the information to be published if there are sufficient reasons to believe that it is plagiarism.
  • The Editorial Board should consider the recommendations of the reviewers when making a final decision on publication of the article. The Editorial Board of the journal is responsible for the decision about publication.

A Conflict of Interests

Each participant of the publishing process should avoid a conflict of interests in any form and at any stage of preparing the manuscript for publishing. In case of a conflict of interest, the parties should take all necessary measures to restore the violated rights of the persons concerned.