Publication ethics

Publication ethics and malpractice statements

UBJ endorses guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and will pursue cases of suspected research and publication misconduct (falsification, plagiarism, data fabrication, citation manipulation, redundant publication, etc.). The Journal also follows the fourth version of the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (identified by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME and published in September 2022) as well as COPE quidelines on Cooperation between research institutions and journals on research integrity cases. The Editorial Board upholds the internationally approved standards of ethical behavior with all parties involved in publishing – authors, reviewers, editors and publisher.

Ethical guidelines and code of conduct for authors, reviewers and editors

All members of the publication process are committed to maintain high ethical standards. The guidelines below provide major ethical issues in publishing and outline obligations of the authors, reviewers and editors.

RESPONSIBILITY OF AUTHORS

Authorship

Authorship is limited to those who have significantly contributed to the research. The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are listed in the article and inappropriate ones are not included in the list. All authors must be named in the manuscript at the time of its submission. Those who have participated in certain aspects of the research should be named in Acknowledgements.

Reporting standards

Authors reporting results of the original research are expected to present an accurate account of the performed study and objective discussion of its significance. All underlying data should be accurately represented. Intentionally inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable. Authors should not submit the same manuscript for consideration to more than one journal concurrently and publish the same, or essentially unchanged, material in more than one (duplicate or multiple) publication.

Originality and acknowledgement of sources

Authors should ensure to submit entirely original work and should properly cite or quote whenever they use the data and/or statements of others. Any statement reported in previous publications should be accompanied by reference. If the manuscript contains material that is someone else's copyright, a permission of the copyright owner to use the material must be obtained and the material should be clearly identified and acknowledged in the text. All sources of financial support for the research should be disclosed.

Declaration of competing interests

Authors must notify the editors of any conflicts of interest with other people or organizations (associated with employment, sources of funding, personal financial interests, relationships, membership of relevant organisations, etc.). All potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.

Confidentiality

Authors should treat communication with UBJ as confidential. Correspondence with the Journal, reviewer reports and other confidential materials must not be posted on any website or otherwise publicized without prior permission from the editors.

Post-publication corrections

Authors must report any significant errors or inaccuracies in their published article to the editors and cooperate with them to make corrections as soon as possible, or if necessary, to retract the paper.

RESPONSIBILITY OF REVIEWERS

Ethical issues

Peer reviewers should conduct their reviews in an ethical and accountable manner. They are expected to follow the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers to uphold the quality and validity of individual manuscripts through the peer review process.

Standards of objectivity

Peer reviewers are asked to focus on scientific value, quality and overall style of the manuscript. They should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is not acceptable. Reviewers are supposed to decline reviewing if they feel unable to provide a fair and unbiased review in a reasonable time-frame.

Confidentiality

All information regarding submitted manuscript and all aspects of its review should be kept strictly confidential and not allowed to be shown to or discussed with anyone other than the Editors. Reviewers are expected not to make use of any material or take advantage of any information they gain through the peer review process.

Alertness to unethical practice

Reviewers should declare any cases of plagiarism and notify the editors of any substantial similarity between the reviewed manuscript and any other published article of which they have personal knowledge. They should alert the editors if a manuscript contains or appears to contain any falsified or manipulated data and any published material without appropriate attribution.

Declaration of competing interests

Reviewers are asked to declare any potential competing interests related to the research (of financial, non-financial, professional or personal nature). Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships and/or connections with any of the authors, or their institutions. After manuscripts are assigned for review, referees are asked to inform the Editor of any conflicts of interest that may exist.

RESPONSIBILITY OF EDITORS

Publication decision

Editors have the main responsibility for scientific quality of the published articles and should base their publication decisions solely on the manuscript quality, importance, originality, clarity and relevance to UBJ scope.

Ethical issues

Editors follow the internationally approved standards of ethical behavior with all parties involved in publishing process. They should ensure that all research material they recommend to publish conforms to the COPE guidelines. The Editor-in-Chief should take reasonably responsive measures in case of ethical complaints concerning submitted manuscript or published article and appeals against editorial decisions.

Confidentiality

Editors should not disclose information about a submitted proposal to anyone other than reviewers or Editorial Board members. Any information or ideas obtained through peer review process must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Unpublished materials disclosed in the submitted manuscript must not be used in anyone's own research without a written consent of the author(s). Editors are committed to preserve the anonymity of reviewers, unless the latter decide to disclose their identities. All allegations of misconduct must be referred to the Editor-in-Chief and kept confidential until thorough examination.

Declaration of competing interests

Editors must take into account any financial, non-financial, professional or personal relationships between authors and reviewers. They are also required to declare their own competing interests. Editors should take action in accordance with the COPE guidelines to disclose any potential conflict of interests. In case of disclosing the competing interests after publication, the appropriate corrections should be made. A retraction notice may be published if needed.

Misconduct investigation

Plagiarism and other forms of misconduct are not acceptable in submissions to UBJ. Editors should not take a decision to publish submitted manuscript, if there are any reasons to suspect any malpractice or plagiarism. During the investigative process, the editors follow the guidelines and requirements outlined by the COPE to identify, assess and handle all individual misconduct cases. The submitted manuscripts may be screened for textual overlaps with previous publications using free online plagiarism checking tools (https://smallseotools.com/plagiarism-checker/, https://plagiarismdetector.net/).

Retraction procedure

If any scientific fraud (fabrication, falsification, plagiarism) or other kinds of misconduct have been revealed after publication, the Editor should consider the possibility of publication retraction. Retracted papers may be retained online, but conspicuously marked as a retraction to minimize harmful effects. A retraction notice containing the reason(s) for the retraction should be quickly published for the reader's benefit.