Publication Ethics | Geology, Geophysics and Environment

DETAILED PUBLICATION ETHICS STATEMENT

This document sets out the detailed principles of publishing ethics as adopted by the Geology, Geophysics and Environment Journal, published by the AGH University of Science and Technology; Faculty of Geology, Geophysics and Environmental Protection, Krakow Poland (hereinafter referred to as “the publisher” or “the publishing house”). These guidelines apply to three main group of actors: the publishing house, the authors and the reviewers/editors.

The Publishing House

The publishing house takes as a reference point the standards developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE, https://publicationethics.org). It will strive to ensure that the guidelines for the journal, authors, editors and all other related parties are adhered to.

In the event of any perceived breach of the ethical guidelines set out here, the publishing house will make the relevant procedures available to all parties. These guidelines will apply not only to authors but also all editorial staff and the journal as a whole.

The relevant procedures are to be found in the policy document “Potential Breaches of Ethical Standards”. It is based on the standards developed by COPE.

The editors will adhere to the submissions guidelines adopted by the journal with regard to both authors and reviewers. These materials provide an explanation of editorial processes and inform about the rights and obligations of authors and reviewers and may be found here

The Editorial Board pledges to ensure that appropriate reviewers will always be selected to consider submissions, guaranteeing that they have the requisite qualifications in the field of the research area concerned.

The publishing house retains the right to withhold the submission from publication if:

(a) the work bears any of the hallmarks of plagiarism or significantly violates the principles of publishing ethics as set out in this document.

(b) there is evidence of the falsification of data or errors in data collection which significantly impairs the reliability (value) of the studies;

Authors

The author agrees to abide by the standards of scientific integrity and ensure their compliance with the principles of publishing ethics.

Authors may only submit works of their own authorship for publication. Failure to disclose the work of other authors will result in the editorial team notifying the relevant entities, including institutions employing the author and relevant scientific and academic societies, at their discretion.

Only unpublished and undeclared works may be submitted for publication. The submission of manuscripts to more than one publishing house at the same time constitutes an example of unethical behavior.

The author agrees to cooperate fully with the editorial board throughout the review process. In particular, following an editorial request, it agrees to provide the data on which the results of the research are based and provide appropriate explanations, as needed.

The author should disclose any conflicts of interest which may have affected or influenced the studies. Examples of such potential conflicts of interest are: royalties, educational grants or other forms of funding, membership of organisations and associations, employment relationships, consultative activities, ownership of shares or patents, licensing agreements, as well as personal or professional relationships. All sources of financial support for work, including a grant number or other reference number of the source of funding, should be disclosed. Failure to do so constitutes a breach of these ethical guidelines.

In the case of multi-author texts, authors are obliged to disclose the contributions of individual authors, including an indication of the author’s precise contribution to the whole work.

Ghost, guest and gift authorship are considered to be examples of ethical malpractice. Should such cases be detected, the editors shall notify the relevant entities, including institutions employing the author and relevant scientific and academic societies, at their discretion

If at significant inaccuracies or errors are observed in the published work a later date, the author should notify the editorial board immediately. The editorial board will, depending on the circumstances, take action in the form of clarification, correction or another action which is deemed appropriate in the next available issue.

The editorial board will take immediate action in the event of suspected non-compliance with the principles of publishing ethics by the author. The editorial board will consider any reported act of unethical publication behaviour, even if detected after the date of publication. Where unethical conduct is established, the publisher will publish a correction, explanatory note, withdraw the text from publication or take other actions which are deemed appropriate to the circumstances.

Reviewers & Editors

The review procedure is subject to the generally accepted academic standards for double-blind peer review.

Descriptions of the review processes shall be public and are publicly available here (https://journals.agh.edu.pl/geol/peerreviewprocess). In the event of significant derogations from the review procedures adopted, the editors should explain their reasons.

Reviews are strictly confidential and shall be made available only to those involved in the editorial process.

All data and information contained in draft manuscripts must remain confidential and may not be used by reviewers or editorial staff, unless given explicit permission to do so by the author.

Reviews must strive to be as objective as possible, with all review comments being substantively argued and evidence based. No personal or derogatory remarks are admissible.

In the event of any conflict of interest, the reviewer agrees that they will signal that fact to the editor and return the text with immediate effect. Reviewers may also decline to review the text for other reasons.

Reviewers may not delegate, outsource or co-author a review without the editorial board's explicit prior consent.

Reviewers agree to report any perceived breaches of intellectual property or professional practice, including but not limited to plagiarism and falsification of data, to the editorial board.

Decisions on the publication of texts are the exclusive competence of the editorial board and will only be taken after consideration of the opinions of at least two independent reviewers who are experts in their field.

The editors will assess manuscripts solely on the basis of their substantive value and thematic consistency with the journal, without the bias in terms of race, sex, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, nationality, religious and political beliefs or the affiliation of authors.

The editorial board will not disclose any information about the submission to anyone other than the author, reviewers, editorial and publication staff.

PROCEDURES FOR POTENTIAL BREACHES OF ETHICAL STANDARDS

Plagiarism

In the event of any cases where plagiarism is suspected in a submission, the editorial board undertakes to collect evidence and take further action depending on the extent of the infringement as outlined below.

Plagiarism software Crossref Similarity Check powered by iThenticate will be used on all manuscripts submitted for review.

If plagiarism is found before printing, the submitted manuscript will be rejected. If evidence of plagiarism emerges after the text has already been published, the editorial board will post information on their website about the withdrawal of the text from the publication and notify the author. Depending on the circumstances, the editorial board will inform the relevant actors, including institutions employing the author and other bodies and organizations, where appropriate.

If no infringement is detected, the editorial board will inform the reviewers and author(s) to this effect.

Already published/submitted work

In the event of suspicion of a duplicate publication, i.e. a copy of the author's own work, in a submission or already published article, the editorial board will undertake to collect evidence and take further action depending on the extent of the infringement.

In cases where there is a significant degree of duplication, the editorial board will reject the submitted manuscript. If the text has already been published, the editors will post information on their website about the withdrawal of the text from the publication and notify the author. Depending on the circumstances, the editorial board will inform the relevant actors, including institutions employing the author and other bodies and organizations, where appropriate.

Where no infringement is detected prior to the review stage, the editorial board will inform the reviewers and author(s) to this effect.

Falsification of data

Where the falsification of data is suspected, the editorial board will collect evidence and analyse it, asking, where necessary, for the opinion of an additional reviewer. After analysing the evidence, the editor will contact the author for further explanation, where necessary.

If the author’s explanations are convincing, the editorial board will thank them for explaining the case, apologize for any inconvenience caused and inform the reporting person that the suspicion was unfounded. If it was flagged at the review stage, the editorial board will initiate a suspended review process.

In cases where the author’s explanations are found to be unconvincing, the editorial board will contact the institutions with which the author is affiliated, as well as those for which the study was carried out, or those from which the study was funded, asking them to investigate the case. If the author is found guilty of a breach or admits their guilt, the editorial board will reject the manuscript submitted or withdraw it from publication. If they are not, the editorial board will thank them for explaining the case, apologize for any inconvenience caused and inform the reporting person that the suspicion was unfounded. If it was flagged at the review stage, the editorial board will initiate a suspended review process.

Addition/Removal of Authors

If requests are made for either the addition or removal of authors, the editorial board will investigate the matter. If it is found to be satisfactory, the editorial board will ask the author to complete the author's declaration, update the list of authors, supplement the list of shares of individual authors and the editorial process will be continued. If the text has already been published, they will undertake to publish a correction.

If there is no consent on the part of all authors to add or remove an author, the editorial board will suspend the editorial process until the issues of authorship have been resolved by the authors.

Publishing consent

If the editorial board receives a complaint that a reviewer has used the author’s work without their consent, they will undertake to examine the case. The first step will be to ask the reviewer to clarify the situation. If the reviewer’s explanations are found to be convincing, the editorial board will end the proceedings following prior consultation with the author. If the reviewer’s explanations are found to be wanting, the editorial board, in cooperation with the reviewer’s institution where necessary, will determines whether malpractice has taken place. During the investigation, the editorial board will suspend the reviewer while proceedings are pending and will not ask them to review other papers at this time. If the reviewer is found guilty of malpractice, the editorial board will terminate cooperation immediately and notify the relevant entities.