Publishing ethics

The editorial board of the journal "Methods and Devices of Quality Control", published by the Ivano-Frankivsk National Technical University of Oil and Gas, maintains a certain level of requirements in the selection and acceptance of articles submitted to the editorial board. These norms are determined by the scientific directions of the journal, which are defined by the Certificate of State Registration, and the standards of quality of scientific works and their presentation, accepted in the scientific community.
The Editorial Board encourages reviewers who participate in evaluating proposed articles in our journal, to adhere to the principles outlined in the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and recommends the following set of ethical guidelines which should be guided by those involved in the publication of research findings in areas relevant to the journal's profile (editors, reviewers, and authors). Submitted materials are not returned and cannot be published in other scientific journals. All manuscripts are checked by certified anti-plagiarism systems. In cases of plagiarism, the authors of the submitted materials are responsible.
Ethical Obligations of the Journal Editor
    1. All submissions are carefully selected and reviewed. The Editorial Board reserves the right to reject the article or to return it for further revision. In the case of his desire to continue cooperation with the publication, the author is obliged to revise the article in accordance with the comments of the reviewers or editorial board.
    2. The editor shall, without prejudice, examine all manuscripts submitted for publication, each in an appropriate manner, regardless of national, racial, religious, gender, nationality, political views, or the position or place of work of the author (s). The editor may, however, take into account the connection of the manuscript under consideration at present with other previously submitted works by the same authors.
    3. The editor should review the manuscripts submitted for publication as quickly as possible.
    4. The sole responsibility for the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript relies on the editor. A responsible and balanced approach to these duties usually means that the editor takes into account the recommendation of the reviewer - Doctor or Candidate of Science in the relevant scientific field - as to the quality and reliability of the manuscript submitted for publication. However, manuscripts may be rejected without review if the editor believes that they do not fit the journal's scope.
    5. The editor and editorial staff shall not provide other persons with any information related to the content of the submission under consideration, other than those involved in the professional evaluation of this manuscript. After a positive decision by the editor, the article is published in a journal and published on the corresponding electronic resources.
    6. Any journal articles or extracts from the electronic networks may be disseminated via electronic networks, but with such distribution, reference to the original source is obligatory. It is prohibited to publish and / or distribute journal material to third parties or organizations on paper and solid electronic media.
    7. In accordance with international law, in respect of copyright to electronic information resources, materials of a site, electronic journal or project may not be reproduced in whole or in part in any form (electronic or printed) without the prior written consent of the authors and the edition of the journal. When using published material in the context of other documents, a reference to the source is required.
    8. The editor should respect the intellectual independence of the authors.
    9. The responsibility and rights of the journal editor in respect of any submitted manuscript, authored by the editor himself, should be delegated to any other qualified person.
    10. Unpublished information, arguments or interpretations disclosed in the submitted manuscript may be used in the editor's own research only with the knowledge of the author. If the manuscript is so closely related to present or past research by the editor that there may be a conflict of interest, the editor should take steps to ensure that any other qualified person assumes editorial responsibility for the manuscript.
    11. If the editor is convinced that the main content or conclusions of a work published in the journal are in error, the editor should facilitate the publication of an appropriate message indicating that error and, if possible, correcting it. This message may be written by the person who detected the error or by an independent author.
    12. The author may require from editor not involve some reviewers when reviewing the manuscript. However, the editor may decide to use one or more of these reviewers if he / she feels that their thoughts are important for impartial review of the manuscript. Such a decision can be made, for example, when there are serious contradictions between this manuscript and the previous work of a potential reviewer.
Ethical Obligations of Reviewers
    1. Since the review of manuscripts is an essential step in the process of publication and, thus, in the implementation of the scientific method as such, every scientist is obliged to perform a certain fate of the works on review.
    2. If the selected reviewer is not convinced that his / her qualification is in line with the level of research presented in the manuscript, he / she shall immediately return the manuscript.
    3. The reviewer must objectively evaluate the quality of the manuscript, the experimental and theoretical work presented, its interpretation and presentation, and consider the extent to which the work meets high scientific and literary standards.
    4. The reviewer should respect the intellectual independence of the authors.
    5. The reviewer should consider the possibility of a conflict of interest when the manuscript is closely related to the current or published work of the reviewer. If in doubt, the reviewer should immediately return the manuscript without review, indicating a conflict of interest.
    6. The reviewer should not evaluate the manuscript with which the author or co-author has personal or professional connections, and if such relationships may affect the manuscript's judgment.
    7. The reviewer must treat the manuscript submitted for review as a confidential document. He should not show the manuscript to other persons or discuss it with other colleagues, except in special cases when the reviewer needs someone's special advice.
    8. Reviewers should adequately explain and substantiate their opinions so that editors and authors can understand why their comments are based. Any statement that an observation, conclusion, or argument has already been published must be accompanied by a link.
    9. The reviewer should note any instances of insufficient citation by the authors of the work of other scholars directly related to the peer-reviewed work; however, it should be borne in mind that remarks about the citation of a reviewer's own research may seem biased. The reviewer should draw the editor's attention to any significant similarity between this manuscript and any published article or any manuscript submitted to another journal at the same time.
    10. The reviewer must provide feedback within 1 week.
    11. Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations contained in this manuscript unless the author agrees. However, when such information indicates that some of the reviewer's own research may be unsuccessful, termination of such work by the reviewer is not contrary to ethical standards.
Ethical Obligations of the Authors
    1. The main responsibility of the author is to provide an accurate report on the research carried out, as well as an objective discussion of its importance with a focus on the possibility of using the results of energy research with priority for the oil and gas industry of Ukraine, as well as related industries, related to its activities with the oil and gas industry.
    2. The authors of the articles bear full responsibility for the content of the articles and for the very fact of their publication. The editorial board does not bear any responsibility to the authors and / or third parties and organizations for the possible damage caused by the publication of the article. The editorial board has the right to remove an article that has already been published if it becomes clear that in the process of publishing the article, one's rights or generally accepted norms of scientific ethics have been violated. The editorial board shall inform the author who submitted the article, the person recommending it, and the organization where the work was performed about the fact of removal of the article.
    3. Journal volume is a limited resource, so the author is obliged to use it wisely and economically.
    4. The initial communication of the results of the study should be sufficiently complete and contain the necessary references to available sources of information so that experts in the field can repeat this work. If necessary, the author should make reasonable efforts to provide other researchers with samples of unusual material that cannot be obtained by any other means; in doing so, appropriate material transfer agreements are adopted that limit the scope of such materials to protect the legitimate interests of the authors.
    5. The author should cite those publications that have had a decisive influence on the nature of the work being taught, as well as those that can quickly acquaint the reader with earlier works that are important to understanding this study. With the exception of reviews, citations of works that are not directly relevant to this message should be minimized. The author is required to conduct a bibliographic search to find and cite original publications that describe research closely related to this publication. The sources of the essential material used in this work should also be properly indicated, if not obtained by the author himself.
    6. The work shall clearly identify any dangerous manifestations and risks associated with the studies.
    7. Fragmentation of research reports should be avoided. A scientist who performs extensive research on a system or group of related systems should arrange for the publication to have a complete report on each aspect of the overall study.
    8. When preparing a manuscript for publication, the author must inform the editor of his or her related manuscripts submitted or accepted for printing. Copies of these manuscripts should be provided to the editor and their links to the manuscript submitted for publication.
    9. An author shall not submit manuscripts describing essentially the same results to more than one journal in the form of a primary publication, unless this is a re-submission of the journal rejected or withdrawn by the author. Suppose you submit a manuscript of a full article that extends a previously published short preliminary report (notice) about the same work. However, when submitting such a manuscript, the editor must be notified of an earlier message, and that prior message must be cited in that manuscript.
    10. The author should clearly indicate the sources of all the information cited or provided, except for the well-known ones. Information obtained privately, in the course of a conversation, in correspondence or in discussion with third parties, cannot be used or communicated in the work of the author without the express permission of the researcher from whom this information was obtained. Information received from providing confidential services, such as when reviewing manuscripts or projects submitted for grants, should be treated in the same way.
    11. Experimental or theoretical research can sometimes serve as a basis for criticizing another researcher's work. Published articles may, where appropriate, contain similar criticism. Personal criticism, however, cannot be considered appropriate under any circumstances.
    12. Co-authors of the article should be those persons who have made significant scientific contributions to the submitted work and who share responsibility for the results obtained. Other contributions should be noted in the notes or in the "Thank you" section. The administrative relations with this study do not in themselves constitute the basis for qualifying the person concerned as a co-author (but in some cases it may be appropriate to note significant administrative assistance in the work). Persons who have died and satisfy the above criteria should be included in the authors list and the date of their death should be noted in the note. Fake names cannot be specified as author or co-author. The author who submits the manuscript for publication is responsible for ensuring that the list of contributors includes all those and only those persons who meet the criteria for authorship. In an article written by several authors, one of the authors, who submits editorial contact information, documents and correspondence with the editors, assumes responsibility for the consent of other authors of the article for its publication in the journal.
    13. Authors should advise the editor of any potential conflict of interest, such as consulting or financial interests of any company, which could be affected by the publication of the results contained in this manuscript. Authors should ensure that no contractual or proprietary considerations exist that could affect the publication of the information contained in the submitted manuscript.

This text, with minor corrections, is taken from the sites of several journals, to which the editorial board, along with the compilers of this text, is grateful.