Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement for the quaterly “Podstawy i Metody Oceny Środowiska Pracy” [Principles and Methods of Assessing the Working Environment]

General Rules

1. Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement for the “Podstawy i Metody Oceny Środowiska Pracy” [Principles and Methods of Assessing the Working Environment] complies with the standards of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, which are available on the website: https://publicationethics.org/.
2. Everyone who is involved in the publication process (the author(s), the journal editor(s), the peer reviewers and the publisher) is required to comply with the ethical standards of publication listed in the above guidelines and in this statement.
3. Confidentiality of all personal data of all persons involved in the publication is ensured in accordance with GDPR requirements (General Data Protection Regulation of 4 May 2016), and confidentiality of all the material submitted to the editorial staff is ensured as well, pending its publication.

Editor’s Responsibilities

The scope of responsibilities

1. The editor may be guided by the members of editorial board of the journal, peer reviewers of the journal and by legal requirements (regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism) in the case of a possible or proven editorial misconduct.
2. The editor may also consult the co-editors, members of the editorial board and peer reviewers of the journal when making other editorial decisions.
3. The editor decides, in close collaboration with the editorial board, which articles submitted to the journal will be published.
4. The editor decides who will be invited to review the submitted articles.
5. The editor shall be responsible for ensuring the reliability of the academic record. This means taking such steps as retracting, publishing erratum and/or apologies and expressions of concern in the case of proven editorial misconduct. This also means preventing violations of intellectual and ethical standards.
6. The editor should ensure the highest scientific (in cooperation with members of editorial board and peer reviewers of the journal) and editorial quality of all articles prepared for publication. The editorial staff of the journal reserves the right to perform linguistic editing of the submitted article.

Ethical oversight

1. The editor takes into account only the scientific value of the submitted article, with no regard to race, ethnic origin, citizenship, gender, sexual orientation, political views or religious belief of the author(s).
2. The editor treats all data – both personal and any information about a submitted manuscript – as confidential. Confidentiality of all data shall be ensured in line with the of GDPR requirements (General Data Protection Regulation of 4 May 2016). The editor and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than – in situations justified be the rules of the editorial and peer review processes – the corresponding author, the co-editors, reviewers and the editorial board members.
3. The editor should ensure that the submitted manuscripts are entirely original works. That is why anti-plagiarism software is used to check the originality of all submitted articles.

Proceeding with editorial misconduct and ethical complaints

1. In the case of a possible or proven editorial misconduct the editor shall take all reasonable steps to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. It means assuring the person who informed about the infringement of ethical rules that the situation will be resolved, collecting all data, contacting appropriate person involved in the editorial process and cooperating during the whole investigation and clarification process.
2. If necessary, the editor undertakes to withdraw the publication of the manuscript in question or – if it has been already published – to publish an erratum and/or explanations, retractions, apologies and expression of concern in the journal.

Conflict of interest

1. Before submitting the article to the reviewers, the editor shall ensure that the reviewer has no conflict of interest with any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the article.
2. The editor requires all contributors to disclose the information about possible conflict of interest, if they are aware of it. If such a conflict is revealed after publication, appropriate steps should be taken, as the publication of expression of concern in the journal.
3. The editor also ensures that the commercial material published in the journal is not contradictory to its ethical rules and does not influence editorial decisions.

Reviewer’s Responsibilities

The scope of responsibilities

1. Peer reviewer assists the editor in making editorial decisions and assists the author in improving the manuscript.
2. The reviewer, like every person involved in the editorial process, is obliged to protect the integrity of the academic record and to agree with the ethical standards of publication listed in this statement. It means a fair and appropriate peer review process and close cooperation with the editor in the case of a suspected or proven editorial misconduct.
3. In the event of a lack of competence in a specific field or other commitments that would prevent a review from being carried in a timely manner, the reviewer should immediately notify the editor so that alternative reviewers can be invited.
4. The reviewer accepts and follows the rules of the peer review process of the journal “Podstawy i Metody Oceny Środowiska Pracy” [Principles and Methods of Assessing the Working Environment].

Rules of the peer review process of the journal 

1. All articles published in the quaterly “Podstawy i Metody Oceny Środowiska Pracy” [Principles and Methods of Assessing the Working Environment]  are reviewed by two independent reviewers (experts in a given field) in accordance with the principle that the reviewer and the author do not know each other’s identity (“double blind reviews”), to avoid any risk of conflict of interest.
2. If one of the reviews is negative, the article is sent to the third reviewer. Two negative reviews result in the article being returned to the author.
3. The article, together with the reviews, is sent to the author, so that he/she can make the modifications and make additions as suggested by the reviewer(s) and the editorial staff and approve the article for printing.
4. Authors are required to respond to the comments of reviewers and send the editorial staff of the quarterly information on whether the comments have been acknowledged and implemented accordingly. The author’s reasoning shall be communicated to the thematic editor, who shall decide whether the author’s explanations are sufficient. The decision to accept the article for publication shall be made by the editor-in-chief in cooperation with thematic editors.

Objectivity

1. The review should be conducted objectively, without any personal criticism of the author.
2. Reviewers should express their opinions in a clear way, using appropriate supporting arguments.

Citations

1. Reviewers should identify and draw the author’s attention to any relevant published work that has not been cited by the author(s).
2. Reviewers should also bring to author’s notice any similarity between the reviewed manuscript and any other published data of which the reviewer has personal knowledge.
3. Reviewers should point out that each statement previously reported in a different work should be accompanied by a relevant citation.

Conflict of interest

Reviewers should not agree to evaluate manuscripts in which they have conflict of interest with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the article.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others without editor’s authorization.

Author’s Responsibilities

The scope of responsibilities

1. The author, like every person involved in the editorial process, is obliged to agree with the ethical standards of publication listed in this statement as well as the rules of peer review and editorial process of the journal “Podstawy i Metody Oceny Środowiska Pracy” [Principles and Methods of Assessing the Working Environment].
2. The corresponding author shall submit a declaration:
   Declaration of the Author.pdf
3. In the case of any content-related or editorial error or breaches of ethical standards of publication, the Author is required to revise the article.
4. Copyright is in accordance with the Act of 4 February 1994 on copyright and related rights (Journal of Laws of 1994, No. 24, item 83).

Authorship

1. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the article.
2. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its publication.
3. The corresponding author should ensure that the list of authors is complete and appropriate.

Originality and Plagiarism

1. Authors confirm that the submitted manuscript is an entirely original work.
2. If the authors have used the work of others it must be appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple publication

Submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal is unacceptable and is treated as the violation of ethical rules. The corresponding author shall submit the declaration mentioned above (in the section on the scope of rights and responsibilities of authors) in which she/he declares that the article has not previously been published, in whole or in part, under the same or a different title.

Conflict of interest

1. Authors should disclose any possible conflict of interest that may have influenced the results of the related study or their interpretation.
2. All sources of financial support for the project are presented in the manuscript and it the declaration mentioned above (in the section on the scope of rights and responsibilities of authors).

Errors

The author is obliged to notify the editor immediately if he/she discovers any significant error or inaccuracy in the published article. The author undertakes to cooperate with the editor in publishing appropriate corrections or, in particularly serious cases, in the withdrawal of the article.

Sources of knowledge

1. Any information derived from other work should be accompanied by the relevant citation and/or quoted.
2. Authors should quote all publications that are relevant to the field of research.

Reporting standards

1. Authors present their studies in an accurate way, with an objective discussion and all underlying data.
2. Determination methods published in the journal “Podstawy i Metody Oceny Środowiska Pracy” [Principles and Methods of Assessing the Working Environment] include analytical procedures presented in a way that allows for their duplication by others. The procedure contains all the details and actions that should be performed step by step.
3. In their articles, authors shall report on all health risks that may be caused by exposure to the described substances or during the performance of the analytical procedure.
4. Knowingly inaccurate statements presented in the manuscripts are unacceptable and are considered unethical.