National Atomic Energy Agency

The scientific journal 'Nuclear Safety and Radiological Protection' aims to ensure the ethics and quality of scientific publications in accordance with the guidelines of the Publication Ethics Committee (COPE). According to the guidelines for respecting ethical standards, all involved entities (authors, reviewers and editors, publisher, members of the Program Council) are obliged to comply with them.

Ethical rules for the editorial office

Editorial Responsibility

1. Actively solicit the views of authors, readers, reviewers and editorial board members on ways to improve the journal's publishing processes.

2. Adapting authorship or co-authorship verification systems that promote good practices (copyright verification and anti-abuse systems (ghost and guest authors phenomena).

3. Editors bear full responsibility for the article submitted for publication and have the right to reject and / or accept it.

4. Editors are responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication.

5. Editors should focus on presenting facts within the research topic, caring for the quality of work (including article structure and clarity of speech), strength and significance of arguments, originality of arguments, contribution to theory building, and knowledge in the field of media and communication.

6. Editors should ensure the anonymity of the reviewers.

7. Editors should ensure that all published research material complies with the guidelines contained in the journal's code of ethics.

8. Editors should take action if they suspect a misconduct in the area of ​​deciding whether to approve or reject a material, and make all reasonable efforts to resolve the issue.

9. Editors are responsible for keeping the publication dates. They should cooperate with the publisher at every stage of the publication process.

10. Editors should prevent any conflicts of interest between employees, authors, reviewers and board members.

 

Ethical principles for the publisher

Criteria for accepting texts for publication

1. Controlling ethical standards: The publisher decides which texts will be published. When accepting texts for publication, the opinions of reviewers are taken into account regarding the scientific value of the work and the originality of the approach to the problem of the transparency of the argument.
2. Controlling ethical standards: The editor-in-chief should uphold and observe publishing standards, the rules of publishing ethics, as well as prevent practices inconsistent with the accepted standards.
3. Principle of scientific integrity: The editor-in-chief cares for the scientific reliability of published works, has the right and obligation to introduce appropriate changes and corrections. In the event of suspicion of unfair practices (e.g. plagiarism, falsification of research results), the User is obliged to withdraw the text from the collective publication.

4. The principle of confidentiality: The publisher does not disclose any information about the submitted works to unauthorized persons. Authorized persons are:

• Author,

• Designated reviewers,

• Editors,

• other people involved in the publishing process;

4. Counteracting conflicts of interest: Unpublished texts may not be used without the written consent of the authors, by the employees of the publishing house or other persons participating in the publishing process. In the event of a conflict of interest, the editorial office is obliged to disclose and describe such a case.
5. Withdrawal of publication: The publisher has the right to withdraw an article from publication if:
6. Withdrawal of publication: The publisher has the right to withdraw an article from publication if:

• One of the two reviewers indicated by the editorial office will express a negative opinion on the publication,

• There is evidence of unreliable test results and / or falsification of data,

• In the event of making unintentional errors (methodological errors, calculation errors),

• The work is plagiarized or violates the principles of publishing ethics.

The publisher's tasks also include:

• Defense and promotion of freedom of expression;

• Maintaining the integrity of the academic record;

• Excluding commercial needs that violate intellectual and ethical standards;

• Ensuring that all published reports and opinions based on the presented research have been reviewed by suitably qualified reviewers;

• Providing appropriate reviewers (individuals who are able to evaluate the work and are free from disqualifying competing interests).

Author Policy

1. The principle of scientific integrity: The author is obliged to provide a reliable description of the research work carried out and an objective interpretation of the results. Papers should contain bibliographic information and footnotes (enabling identification of data sources and also repetition of research).

Note: Ghostwriting and guest authorship practices are a manifestation of scientific misconduct and any detected cases should be unmasked, including notification of relevant entities, such as institutions employing the author, scientific societies, associations of scientific editors, etc. Presentation and interpretation of data inconsistent with the principles of publishing ethics, as well as research results is unacceptable and may result in the text being withdrawn from print.

2. The principle of the reliability of sources: The author is obliged to list in the attachment bibliography the publications that he used to create the text.

 

3. The principle of originality of the work: The author may submit for publication only his own original texts. Research results and / or parts of other scientists' publications used in the publication should be marked to indicate that it is a quotation. Plagiarism or falsification of data are unacceptable.

4. The principle of data disclosure: The author may be asked by the editors of the bulletin to present the raw research results, the results of which have been published in the text. Obliged to provide access to this data, also after the publication of the work.

Note: Authors submitting multi-author texts for publication are required to disclose the contribution of individual authors to its creation (including the affiliation of the authors and information who is the author of the concepts, assumptions, methods, protocol, etc. used in creating the text).

5. If the text is a co-authorship, the authors or the sole author are responsible for disclosing this fact.

6. The rules regarding errors in published works: If the author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in his text, he is obliged to immediately notify the publisher in order to correct the errors at the next edition or reprint.

Reviewer Policy

1. Cooperation with the editorial team: The reviewer reviews the work at the request of the editorial office. In this way, it influences the decisions made by the publishing house. Reviews influence the final shape and improvement of the published work.

2. Principle of timeliness: The reviewer is obliged to deliver the review within the set time limit. If for some reason (content-related, lack of time, etc.) he is unable to meet the deadline or undertake a review, he should immediately inform the editors about it.

3. The principle of confidentiality: All reviews and reviewed papers are confidential. Disclosing them to third parties is unacceptable (except for people who are involved in the publishing process).

4. The principle of maintaining the standards of objectivity: The review should be objective. Personal criticism of the author of the work is considered inappropriate. All comments of the reviewer should be properly justified.

5. The principle of source reliability: The reviewer, if necessary, should indicate relevant works related to the subject of the text not quoted by the author. It should indicate and report to the publisher any significant similarities of the reviewed text to other works.

6. The principle of counteracting a conflict of interest with a reviewer: A reviewer may not use the reviewed work for his personal needs and benefits. Nor should he judge the text where there may be a conflict of interest with the author.