Publication Ethics

Ethical Principles for Authors

I. Authorship, Originality and Sole Responsibility

  1. Only a human being may be recognised as the author of an article. Generative artificial intelligence (GAI) tools may not be recognised as authors or co-authors, nor may they be cited as authors.
  2. Authors bear full and sole responsibility for the content of the submitted manuscript, including any breaches of publication ethics.
  3. Authorship is limited exclusively to persons who have made a substantial creative contribution. All of the following conditions must be met jointly:
    • making a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the research, or to the collection, analysis or interpretation of the results;
    • drafting the manuscript, making a significant contribution to its writing, or critically reviewing the intellectual content contained therein;
    • approving the final version of the manuscript before its submission to the journal and publication;
    • accepting responsibility for all aspects of the research in order to ensure that any questions concerning the accuracy and integrity of the work are properly investigated and resolved.
  4. Obtaining funding, providing access to equipment or training, collecting data without substantive involvement, general administrative supervision, or holding a managerial position shall not constitute grounds for assigning co-authorship of an article.
  5. Authors are required to disclose the contribution of each author to the preparation of the article.
  6. Ghostwriting, understood as omitting persons who have made a substantial contribution in order to conceal their involvement, and guest authorship, understood as assigning authorship to persons who did not contribute or whose contribution was negligible, constitute forms of scientific misconduct.

II. Prohibition of the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI)

  1. The use of GAI tools to create the following elements of an article is prohibited:
    • the abstract;
    • the research aim and research gaps;
    • the hypothesis and set of research questions;
    • the introduction;
    • the description of the methodology;
    • the literature review/bibliography, including the evaluation and analysis of the literature;
    • analyses or descriptions of data/results;
    • the discussion;
    • the conclusions.
  2. The generation or reporting of results, as well as the reporting of statistics in the text, using a generative GAI tool is not permitted. The creation of graphic forms by generative AI is not permitted in publications, unless such forms constitute the subject of the research presented in the article. 
  3. Articles containing prohibited uses of GAI will be rejected. In the event of a breach of this prohibition and the detection of GAI use, the manuscript will be rejected and treated as a case of scientific misconduct.

III. Scientific Integrity, Research Data and Ethical Oversight

  1. Authors are required to conduct, present and objectively interpret research in a reliable manner. Manuscripts should contain sufficient information, including descriptions of methods and instruments, to enable other researchers to replicate the study.
  2. Originality of the work and prohibition of data falsification:
    • the submitted article must constitute the author’s own intellectual work;
    • the fabrication of research results, understood as including data that were not obtained, the falsification of research results, understood as modifying or omitting obtained data, or the invention/fabrication of research methods is prohibited;
    • false or knowingly inaccurate statements are not permitted.
  3. Reliability of sources and plagiarism:
    • plagiarism, understood as the appropriation of another person’s intellectual work without indicating the source, is one of the most serious breaches of good academic practice and is prohibited;
    • authors must strictly respect intellectual property rights and indicate the publications that influenced the preparation of the article;
    • citing non-existent bibliographic references is strictly prohibited;
    • self-plagiarism, understood as republishing the same work or substantial parts thereof without indicating the original publication, is prohibited.
  4. Authors are required to document and archive original source data, including primary research results, in a manner that prevents manipulation. Such data should remain available after publication of the results for a period appropriate to the relevant scientific discipline. Authors should be prepared to provide unprocessed research results upon request by the editorial office, reviewers or other authors, including after publication. Access to research data should be open to the greatest extent possible.
  5. Where the content of an article concerns research involving living organisms, including humans and/or animals, the author must provide approval from an ethics committee or another relevant permit to conduct such research. Research involving human participants must be conducted with respect for human dignity and for other living beings. The informed consent of research participants is required.

IV. Avoiding Publication Misconduct

  1. Authors are required to disclose any conflicts of interest that may have influenced the research results or their interpretation. Conflicts of interest include personal relationships, social relations, professional subordination, economic dependencies or institutional affiliations.
  2. Authors are required to disclose all sources of financial support, including grants and subsidies, as well as the contribution of scientific and research institutions, associations and other entities to the preparation of the article.
  3. Principle of avoiding duplicate, redundant or simultaneous publication:
    • authors should not publish materials describing the same research in more than one journal or primary publication;
    • submission of an article for publication constitutes a declaration that the text has not been previously published and is not simultaneously under consideration by other journals. Submitting the same article to more than one editorial office is unethical and prohibited;
    • unjustified expansion of publication output by repeatedly documenting the same scientific achievement or by dividing material that could be presented in a single work into a series of separate publications, known as duplicate/salami publication, is prohibited.
  4. If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their work, either before or after publication, they are required to notify the Editor-in-Chief immediately.
    • in cooperation with the Editor-in-Chief, an erratum, addendum or correction should be published;
    • retraction of the text is considered in cases involving unreliable results, data falsification, plagiarism, self-plagiarism or breaches of ethical principles.
  5. By submitting a manuscript, authors accept the Open Access policy and the terms of the licence under which the publication will be made available, namely CC BY 4.0. Authors grant the journal publisher a non-exclusive licence to use the work in all fields of exploitation.

V. Procedure and Consequences of Breaches

  1. All instances of scientific misconduct will be recorded and archived. Any detected cases of this kind will be documented.

In the process of processing authors’ personal data in connection with publication, the Data Controller acts in accordance with the GDPR, ensuring the rights of access, rectification, erasure, restriction of processing, and the right to lodge a complaint with the President of the Personal Data Protection Office.

VI. Formal Requirements and Declarations

Submission of an article for publication constitutes acceptance of the principles related to the publishing procedure. Therefore, the author, and the corresponding author in the case of co-authorship, is required to submit the following declarations in written form or through the OJS system, while also accepting the terms of these ethical principles:

  • a declaration of originality and truthfulness of the data;
  • a declaration that the text has not been submitted for review to another journal;
  • a declaration of no conflict of interest;
  • indication of the contribution of each author;
  • disclosure of sources of funding;
  • confirmation that all authors have approved the final version of the text;
  • confirmation of ethical compliance;
  • commitment to make data available;
  • third-party legal permissions.

 

Ethical Principles for Reviewers

I. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI)

  1. The use of generative AI is prohibited throughout the entire process of preparing an article review.

II. Conflict of Interest, Competence and Objectivity

  1. Reviewers are required to carefully assess their substantive competence in the relevant field and their practical ability to prepare the review within the designated timeframe. In case of doubt, the Reviewer should refrain from reviewing the article and inform the editorial team of this decision within 2 days of receiving the invitation to review the article.
  2. If a potential conflict of interest is identified, the Reviewer is required to notify the Editor and decline to participate in the review process.
  3. A conflict of interest is understood as close personal relationships, kinship, professional subordination, or direct scientific cooperation during the five years preceding the year in which the review is prepared. Reviewers should not be employees of the unit in which the Author works. 
  4. Reviews should be prepared objectively, reliably and constructively, without personal comments. Reviewers should express their views clearly, supporting them with appropriate and specific arguments. Personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable.

III. Confidentiality, Verification and Misconduct

  1. Reviewed articles must be treated as confidential documents, and their content must not be disclosed to third parties.
  2. Confidential information or ideas arising from the review process must be kept secret and may not be used for personal advantage.
  3. Reviewers are required to disclose all observed instances of lack of scientific integrity.
  4. Reviewers should indicate irregularities in the citation of sources, bibliographic deficiencies, and possible similarities between the content of the reviewed article and other publications.
  5. Reviewers must not in any way coerce authors into citing their own works.

IV. Procedures and Final Decisions

  1. Reviewers are required to complete the review within three weeks. If a Reviewer is unable to meet this deadline, they should immediately inform the Section Editor.
  2. The review must clearly state the Reviewer’s recommendation concerning the article, indicating whether the article:

a. may be accepted for publication without changes;
b. may be accepted for publication after author’s corrections, without the need for a further review;
c. may be accepted for publication after author’s corrections and a further review;
d. should be rejected.

  1. The conclusion of the review should be justified in its analytical part.
  2. The Reviewer may not delegate the task of preparing the review to another reviewer without the prior express consent of the Section Editor.
  3. The Reviewer supports the Editor-in-Chief in making editorial decisions and is required to report any cases of unauthorised use of intellectual property.
  4. The review is performed free of charge, and the editorial team does not provide any remuneration or other forms of compensation for it.

Ethical Principles for the Editorial Team

I. Editor’s Responsibility and Publication Standards

  1. The Editor-in-Chief and the editorial team are responsible for all content published in the journal. The Editor-in-Chief is required to comply with the current legal framework concerning defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
  2. Members of the editorial team are required to ensure the scientific integrity of published works and to make every effort to preserve their integrity. Editors should eliminate any scientific or ethical irregularities.
  3. The editorial team and the publisher are required to continuously improve publishing processes and to strive to raise scientific, editorial and ethical standards. Knowledge of ethical issues should be continuously developed and updated in accordance with materials published by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).

II. Decision-Making Process, Objectivity and Confidentiality

  1. Articles are evaluated solely on substantive grounds and on the basis of the scientific value of the work.
  2. In making a publication decision, the key criteria are: the scientific significance of the work, the originality of the approach to the problem, clarity, and compliance with the journal’s thematic scope and ethical principles. The Editor-in-Chief takes into account the Reviewers’ opinions concerning the original and creative presentation of the issue, as well as the relevance of the research methods, subject matter and cited literature.
  3. The editorial team ensures the proper selection of Reviewers and follows the adopted transparent review procedure. The review process is conducted anonymously, in the form of double-blind peer review.
  4. A submitted article must be treated as a confidential document. No member of the editorial team may disclose information about the submitted work to any person other than, in accordance with the publishing procedure, the Author, Reviewers, potential Reviewers or the Publisher.
  5. If a negative decision is made, rejected articles or parts thereof may not be used in the own research of members of the editorial team or Reviewers without the written consent of the Authors.
  6. The editorial team is required to inform the Author(s) of the outcome of the editorial assessment of the submitted text. The editorial team is responsible for evaluating and approving materials intended for publication.
  7. In the case of an article authored by employees, doctoral students or students of the home university, or by members of the editorial team or the Scientific Board, the Editors shall appoint Reviewers who are not employees of Kielce University of Technology. The person submitting the text is excluded from the editorial and review process.

III. Prohibition of the Use of GAI

  1. Generative artificial intelligence (GAI) tools or AI-assisted technologies may not be used by Editors to support the assessment process or decision-making concerning an article.
  2. The use of generative artificial intelligence in the assessment of an article is prohibited. Critical thinking and original judgement go beyond the capabilities of this technology. Furthermore, there is a risk that GAI may generate incorrect, incomplete or biased conclusions concerning the article.
  3. Due to the requirement of confidentiality, Editors should not submit correspondence to GAI tools, even if the purpose is only to improve language and readability. Editors must be aware that chatbots may retain and publicly disclose the input data provided to them, including the content of the article. Such actions violate the confidentiality of the submitted authorial material. 
  4. Editors shall assess, in each case, the appropriateness of the use of GAI tools in the Author’s work. Editors verify each submitted text using plagiarism detection software and, additionally, AI-content detectors, bearing in mind their technical limitations and the risk of misclassification. 

IV. Management of Reviewers and Prevention of Conflicts of Interest

  1. The editorial team must ensure the proper selection of Reviewers, taking into account their substantive expertise, scientific achievements and previous reliability.
  2. The editorial team is required to prevent conflicts of interest involving Reviewers. Persons who are in a direct professional subordination relationship with the Authors of the texts shall not be appointed as Reviewers. A Reviewer must not have close personal or professional relationships with the Author.
  3. Reviewed articles must be treated as confidential documents. Confidential information or ideas arising from the review process may not be used for personal advantage. 
  4. The editorial team requires Reviewers to report any significant similarities between the reviewed article and other works, as well as any suspicions of erroneous data/research or data manipulation.

V. Procedure in Cases of Misconduct and Errors

  1. The editorial team applies measures aimed at preventing, identifying and documenting misconduct and authorial unreliability. Ghostwriting and guest authorship are recognised as forms of scientific misconduct. If such breaches are confirmed, the editorial team documents them and may notify the relevant institutions.
  2. All instances of scientific misconduct must be recorded and archived. In the event of suspected unethical practices, including plagiarism or falsification of research results, the editorial team collects documentation and suspends the processing of the article until the matter is clarified. If the breaches are confirmed, the article is rejected; in the case of an already published article, the editorial team retracts the article and notifies the relevant institutions.
  3. The editorial team considers complaints and appeals in accordance with the journal’s ethical principles. The editorial team is required to respond in writing to submitted complaints within 30 days from the date on which the complaint is submitted by the author.
  4. The editorial team is prepared to publish corrections, errata and retractions. The editorial team may consider retracting an article if there is clear evidence of unreliable research results, data fabrication, prior publication of the research results elsewhere, plagiarism or self-plagiarism. In cases where breaches are detected, the editorial team acts in accordance with COPE procedures and flowcharts.
  5. The editorial team ensures the protection of whistleblowers reporting breaches of ethical principles in scientific work by protecting them against unwanted disclosure of their data and possible retaliation.

VI. Legal Transparency, Licences and Finances

  1. The editorial team and the Publisher do not charge Authors any fees for the submission, publication, review or processing of articles, including article processing charges (APCs). The journal’s business model is based on institutional support provided by the Publisher.
  2. The editorial team informs readers about the sources of publication funding and institutional support.
  3. The editorial team supports the Open Access policy. This means that all content is available free of charge to users and institutions. Publications are made available under the CC BY 4.0 licence.
  4. The personal data controller, Kielce University of Technology, processes personal data in accordance with the GDPR. Every person has the right to access their data, rectify them, restrict their processing and erase them, where permitted by law, as well as the right to lodge a complaint with the President of the Personal Data Protection Office.