Publication ethics

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors

 

Ethical guidelines for journal publication

 The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journal "Seismoprognosis Observations in the Territory of Azerbaijan" is an essential step in the development of a coherent and respected body of knowledge. It reflects the quality of the research of the authors and the institutions supporting them. Peer-reviewed articles uphold the scientific method and represent high ethical standards. Therefore, all stakeholders involved in the publication process—the author, the editor, the reviewer, the publisher, and the society—must adhere to clear ethical standards.

The editorial board of the journal "Seismoprognosis Observations in the Territory of Azerbaijan" is committed to the integrity of the entire publishing process, ensuring that all steps are conducted ethically. Commercial factors such as advertising or reprints do not affect editorial decisions.

 

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards

Authors must provide a precise and accurate representation of their research, along with an objective discussion of its significance. The paper must include enough details and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable.

 

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide raw data for editorial review and should be prepared to keep such data for a reasonable period post-publication.

 

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their work is original. If they use the work or words of others, they must cite or quote them appropriately. Plagiarism, in any form, is unethical and unacceptable.

 

 

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously is unethical. Authors should avoid publishing similar research in more than one journal.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must give proper credit to the works they have referenced. Private information or insights obtained in the course of confidential services, such as peer review, must not be used without explicit permission.

 

 

 

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should reflect those who made significant contributions to the research. All co-authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission.

 

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the research involves hazardous chemicals, procedures, or materials, the author must clearly identify these risks. For research involving human or animal subjects, authors must confirm that all relevant institutional and legal guidelines were followed and that informed consent was obtained.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial or other conflicts of interest that could influence the interpretation of their work. All sources of financial support should be listed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When an author discovers a significant error in their published work, they must notify the editor and collaborate to retract or correct the paper.

 

Duties of Editors

Publication Decisions

The editor is responsible for deciding which articles are published. This decision should be based on the work’s relevance and quality, guided by the editorial board’s policies, and free from commercial influence.

Fair Play

Editors must evaluate manuscripts without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

Confidentiality
Editors and their staff must treat submitted manuscripts as confidential, sharing information only with those involved in the publication process.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished material must not be used by the editor or staff for personal research without written consent from the author. Editors must recuse themselves from processing manuscripts where they have conflicts of interest.

Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations

Editors should take action when ethical complaints arise, working with authors, reviewers, or institutions as necessary. Every case of unethical behavior must be investigated, even if it surfaces long after publication.

 

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewers play a critical role in the editorial process, helping the editor make decisions and offering authors suggestions for improvement. Every reviewer has an ethical obligation to contribute to the review process when asked.

Promptness
If a reviewer is unable to review a manuscript promptly or lacks the necessary expertise, they should notify the editor and withdraw from the process.

Confidentiality
Manuscripts under review must be treated as confidential documents and not shared or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviewers should provide objective feedback with clear supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should point out relevant work that has not been cited by the authors and alert the editor to any significant similarity between the manuscript and other published papers.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must not use unpublished information from a manuscript for their personal benefit. They should decline to review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.

 

This statement adheres to the ethical guidelines set forth by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) and follows best practices for scientific publishing integrity.