The editorial board of the scientific and technical journal on navigation problems «Navigation News» adheres to the principles of publication ethics adopted by the international community, as reflected, in particular, in the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and takes into account the experience of reputable international magazines and publishers.

In order to avoid unfair practice in publishing activities (plagiarism, presentation of false information, etc.) and to ensure high quality of scientific publications, as well as public recognition of the scientific results obtained by the author, each member of the editorial board, author, reviewer, publisher, as well as institutions participating in publishing process are obliged to comply with ethical standards, norms and rules and take all reasonable steps to prevent violations. Compliance with the rules of ethics of scientific publications by all participants in this process helps to ensure the rights of authors to intellectual property, improve the quality of publications and exclude the possibility of illegal use of copyright materials.

 

Principles of professional ethics of the publisher

In its activities, the publisher (JSC «RTC «Internavigation») is responsible for the publication of copyrighted works, which entails the need to follow the following fundamental principles and procedures:

1. Promote the ethical responsibilities of the editorial board, editorial and publishing team, editorial board, reviewers and authors in accordance with these requirements.
2. Provide the support to the editorial staff of Navigation News in reviewing ethical concerns about published material and to help interact with other journals and / or publishers if this facilitates the performance of editors’ duties.
3. Ensure the confidentiality of the publication received from the authors and any information until the moment of its publication.
4. Understand that the activity of the journal is not a commercial project and does not carry the goal of making a profit.
5. Always be ready to post corrections, clarifications, rebuttals, and apologies when necessary.
6. Ensure that the editorial board is able to exclude publications containing plagiarism and inaccurate data.
7. The publisher (editor) has the right to reject the manuscript or demand that the author revise it if it is framed in violation of the Rules adopted in this journal and agreed with the Publisher.
8. The article, if accepted for publication, is placed in the public domain; copyrights are reserved by the authors.
9. Post information about financial support for the research, if the author provides such information to the article.
10. If grammatical, stylistic and other errors are found, the editorial board undertakes to take all measures to eliminate them.
11. Coordinate with the author on the editorial proofs introduced into the article.
12. Not to delay the release of the journal.

 

Ethics of authorship of scientific publications

An author (or a group of authors) when submitting articles to the scientific and technical journal «Navigation News» realizes he or she bears primary responsibility for novelty and reliability of research results which implies compliance with the following principles:

1. Authors of an article must provide reliable results of conducted studies. Knowingly erroneous or fraudulent statements are unacceptable.
2. Authors must ensure that results of a study set out in a submitted manuscript are completely original. Format of borrowed fragments or statements must contain an indication of the author and the source. In the case of using fragments of others’ works and/or other authors’ statements, corresponding bibliographic references must be formatted to contain a mandatory indication of the author and the source.
3. It is necessary to acknowledge a contribution of every person who in one way or another influenced the course of a research, in particular, references to the works that mattered when conducting a research must be presented in an article.
4. Authors must not submit a manuscript that was sent to another journal and is under consideration, as well as an article that has already been published in another journal.
5. All persons who have made a significant contribution to a research must be listed as co-authors. It is unacceptable to list persons who did not participate in the research among co-authors.
6. Authors must necessarily disclose conflicts of interest that can influence an assessment and interpretation of their manuscripts, as well as sources of financial support (grants, governmental programs, projects, etc.).
7. Authors must immediately notify the editorial board of the journal if they find an error in any work submitted or accepted for publication, as well as in any already published work, and contribute to correction of an error. Authors must immediately correct an error or provide evidence of its absence if the editorial board finds out about an error from third parties.
8. Authors must comply with the copyright protection legal norms; materials protected by copyright (for example, tables, figures or large quotations) may only be reproduced with the owner’s permission.
9. Authors must adhere to ethical principles, when criticizing or commenting a third-party research.
10. Authors must respect the work of the editorial board and peer reviewers and address indicated shortcomings or explain it reasonably.
11. Authors must provide and format a manuscript in compliance with the guidelines.

 

 

Peer review ethics

A peer reviewer conducts a scientific examination of authors’ materials and therefore his actions must be impartial that means observing the following principles:

1. A manuscript received for review must be viewed as a confidential document, which cannot be handed over to third parties for familiarization or discussion, if they are not authorized by the editorial board.
2. Violation of confidentiality is only possible in a case of statement of authenticity or falsification of materials, in all other cases, its preservation is required.
3. Peer reviewers are not allowed to make copies of manuscripts for their needs.
4. A peer reviewer must give an objective and reasoned assessment of presented results of a research aimed at improving the scientific level of a manuscript. Personal criticism of an author is unacceptable.
5. A peer reviewer must draw an editor-in-chief’s attention to a substantial or partial similarity between a manuscript under consideration and any other work, as well as to a lack of references to statements, conclusions or arguments previously published in the author’s or other’s works.
6. A peer reviewer must note published works that are not cited (in an article).
7. A peer reviewer must notify the journal if he finds any conflicts of interest or any other circumstances prevent him from forming a fair and impartial assessment of an article.
8. A peer reviewer who believes that he is not an expert on issues considered in an article or that he will not be able to submit an article review must immediately inform the editorial Board about his inability to review a submitted article.
9. Independent peer reviewers are informed of the requirements for them and provided information about any changes in editorial policy.
10. The editorial Board protects the confidentiality of peer reviewers’ personal data.

 

Ethics of Scientific publications editing

In its activities, the editorial office, the staff of the editorial-publishing group and the members of the editorial Board are responsible for disclosure of authors’ works, which requires compliance with the following principles

1. When deciding on publication, the editor-in-chief is guided by the reliability of the data presentation and the scientific significance of the work in question.
2. The editor-in-chief ensures a confidential, independent, honest and objective review of manuscripts, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship, social status or political preferences of authors.
3. Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts should not be used for personal purposes or passed on to third parties without the written consent of the author. Information or ideas obtained during editing and associated with possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
4. The editor-in-chief should not allow information to be published if there are sufficient grounds to believe that it is plagiarism.
5. The editor-in-chief should:

— constantly improve the journal;

— follow the principle of freedom of opinion;

— strive to meet the needs of the readers and the authors of the journal;

— exclude the influence of the interests of business or politics on the decision to publish materials;

— make a decision on the publication of materials, guided by the following main criteria: compliance of the manuscript with the subject of the journal; relevance, novelty and scientific significance of the presented article; clarity of presentation; reliability of results and completeness of conclusions. The quality of research and its relevance are the basis for a decision to publish;

— take all reasonable measures to ensure the high quality of published materials and protect the confidentiality of personal information;

— take into account the recommendations of the reviewers when making the final decision on the publication of the article. Responsibility for the decision on publication lies entirely with the editorial board of the journal;

— be able to justify the decision for acceptance or rejection of the article;

— provide the author of the reviewed material with an opportunity to substantiate his research position;

— With the change of editor-in-chief new editor should not overrule the decisions of previous editors.

6. The editor-in-chief commits to promptly consider every complaint about unethical behavior of authors of manuscripts and already published articles, regardless of the time of delivery. It commits to undertake appropriate reasonable measures in respect of such complaints. If the complaint is confirmed, the editorial board has the right to reject publication of the article, cease further cooperation with the author, publish a retraction, and take other necessary measures to further curb unethical behaviour of this author.

 

Ethics of scientific articles publishing

In carrying out his activities the publisher is responsible for publishing authors’ works, which implies the necessity of adhering to the following principles:

1. The publisher encourages the editorial board, peer-reviewers and authors to fulfill ethical obligations in compliance with these requirements.
2. The publisher must support the journal’s editorial board in consideration of complaints about ethic aspects of published materials and help to cooperate with other journals and/or publishers, scientific and research organizations and industry associations on the issues relating to ethical problems, tracking errors and publishing denials in particular.
3. The publisher ensures well-timed publication of the journal.
4. The publisher ensures confidentiality of submitted manuscript and any information until its publishing.
5. The publisher must be ready to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.
6. The publisher must make it possible for the editorial board to exclude publications containing plagiarism and false data.
7. The publisher undertakes to publish information about financial support for a research, if an author gives such information to an article.

 

Conflicts of interest

In order to avoid cases of violation of publication ethics, a conflict of interests of all parties involved in the process of publishing the manuscript should be excluded. A conflict of interest arises when an author, reviewer, or editorial board member has a financial, scientific, or personal relationship that could affect their actions. Such relationships are called dual commitments, competing interests, or competing loyalties.

In order to prevent conflicts of interest and in accordance with the accepted ethical standards of the journal, each of the parties has the following responsibilities.

The editor is obliged:

— to give the manuscript for consideration to another member of the editorial board if the originally appointed reviewer has a conflict of interest with the author of the submitted manuscript;

— to request from all participants of the manuscript publication the information about the possibility of competing interests;

— to make a decision on the publication of the information specified in the author’s letter concerning the conflict of scientific and / or financial interests, if it is not confidential and may affect the assessment of the published work by the reader or the scientific community;

— to ensure the publication of amendments if information on the conflict of interest was received after the publication of the article.

The author is obliged:

— to indicate the place of his work and the source of research funding.

The reviewer is obliged:

— inform the editor-in-chief about the presence of a conflict of interest (dual obligations, competing interests) and refuse to review the manuscript.

 

Violations

If publication ethics is breached by the editor, authors or peer reviewer, a mandatory investigation is required. This applies to both published and unpublished materials. The editorial board must demand clarification, without involving those who may have a conflict of interest with one of the parties.

If the material containing significant inaccuracies has been published, it must be modified immediately in a way accessible to readers and indexing systems.