Institute of Fluid-Flow Machinery
Polish Academy of Sciences

In order to achieve the highest standards of publication ethics, IMP PAN has introduced COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics)

https://publicationethics.org/,
https://publicationethics.org/files/editable-bean/COPE_Core_Practics_0.0.pdf,

for our continuous releases - IMP PAS Flow Machine Sheets, Flow Machine series, Monograph series and commemorative releases.

In this tab, we remind you of the most important obligations falling on all participants of the publication process – Authors, Reviewers, Editors and Members of the Drafting Committee connected with the introduction of COPE practices.

• The monographs submitted for publication should correspond to scientific disciplines represented by the IMP PAN Publishing House and should be prepared for printing in accordance with the format proposed on the website of the Publishing Company.
• It is assumed that the published work will constitute the development of its own research or/and a critical review of research conducted by other researchers. The authors are responsible for the accuracy of the results presented and the reliability and precision of the opinions provided.
• The publication for printing means that the authors have copyrights, the manuscript has not been published or filed for publication in another publication, except for abstract form.
• The reference to the work of other authors should be duly cited. The exact repetition of the words of other Authors should be recorded in quotes. The authors' written consent shall be obtained on the reprint of the drawing, photograph or table from another work.
• The authors of the publication are only and only all those who contributed to the creation of the publication at the stage of research and development of results.
• The author responsible for correspondence with the Editorial Board communicates information to the other authors of the publication and obtains permission from all authors to publish and establish the order of the authors of the publication.
• The authors of the publication bear full responsibility for the content contained in the publication. The opinions expressed in the publication reflect only the position of the Authors, not the position of the Publishers and Editors.
• Where errors or inconsistencies are found at each stage of the publication process, Authors should take care of correction and provide immediate information to the Publishing House.
• In the event of a breach of the standards of research ethics and publication ethics, The publishing house will take the actions set out in the law against the Authors who committed the violation.
• Complaints regarding the refusal of publication on IMP PAN Publishing House, Authors should report to the Editor of Scientific Publishing House. Complaints should refer to the level of scientific work and the usefulness of its publication. The final decision will be taken by the Scientific Editor after detailed analysis of the arguments provided by the Authors and consultation of the Drafting Committee.

The author responsible for correspondence with the Editorial Board shall communicate the right to commercial distribution of publications in book (paper) and electronic form.

When submitting a manuscript for publication, the authors assume responsibility for stating that there is no conflict of interest of a personal, professional, financial and other nature in the research process and in the development of the publication, which could affect the reliability of the studies and the objectivity of the wording. In the absence of information on the possibility of a conflict of interest, The publishing house assumes that there is no conflict of interest.

The following are some examples of violations of research ethics and publication ethics:

• falsification and fabrication of data,
• plagiarism or reprint of ideas, research results of other authors without obtaining their consent and properly quoting their works,
• double reporting of the manuscript to various publishers, also double reporting of a significant part of the manuscript,
• manipulation of publications by adding false authors or hiding real authors,
• manipulations of authors' affiliations by adding false affiliations or hiding true authors' affiliations.

The publication treats with seriousness all allegations of violation of the ethics of scientific research and publication ethics. If an ethics infringement is found at each stage of the publication process, The publication immediately suspends the publication process and takes appropriate legal action.

Reviewers assist the Editor of Scientific Publishing and the Editorial Committee in reviewing the content of the reported work.

• Reviewers may refuse to carry out reviews without giving reasons.
• Reviewers have 7 days to decide whether they are making timely reviews. Reviewers usually receive 1 month to prepare reviews and send recommendations to the Editor. In the absence of recommendations within the set time, the Drafting sends Reviewer a reminder of the past review date. If the Reviewer does not respond to two further reminders, the Editor shall appoint a new Reviewer.
• The reviewer should refuse to carry out a work review if there is a conflict of interest between the Reviewer and any of the authors of the work that may affect the objectivity of the opinion. The reviewer should also refuse to carry out the job reviews he himself participated in.
• The review should be based on scientific arguments and should avoid emotional wording. Review should also be free from personal, racial and religious prejudices. The reviewer is obliged to point out the strengths and weaknesses of the reported work.
• If the work does not meet the required publication standards for each monographic series, it is characterised by insufficient scientific and research value or has other shortcomings, the Reviewer is encouraged to present his own constructive proposals to raise the publication value of the manuscript that would bring the Authors closer to publishing the work.
• Information contained in the reported work should be treated as confidential. Before publishing the work Reviewer must not spread ideas contained in the work, nor use them in his research, nor use them in criticism of the authors' achievements. After publication, Reviewer may not disclose content originally contained in the work that was not included in the publication or disclose the content of the authors' correspondence.
• Any violation of the ethics of scientific research and publication ethics identified by the Reviewer should be immediately notified to the Editor of the Publishing House and supported by factual arguments and relevant documents.
• The reviewer may not subcontract a review to another person, such as an assistant, PhD student or associate, without the Editor's written consent. Any person who has helped with the review should be mentioned in it.
• The reviewer is not authorized to contact the Authors while performing reviews without editing.

• Editor of the Publishing House designates Reviewers of the work submitted for publication on the basis of their competence, experience and moral status. The editor respects the authors' suggestions about not submitting work to the review to specific persons named by the Authors. In the selection of Reviewers, the Editor should pay particular attention to avoiding conflicts of interest in the review process in order to eliminate personal, financial or business relationships between Reviewers and Authors that could undermine the objectivity of Reviewers' opinions.
• The editor shall make a final decision to publish or refuse publication after receiving an opinion from appointed Reviewers and the authors' replies to the reviews received. The Editor may consult the Members or Members of the Drafting Committee.
• The editor and members of the editorial committee shall not disseminate ideas contained in the work, use them in their research or use them in criticism of the authors' achievements. After publication, they may not disclose original content contained in the work which was not included in the publication or disclose the content of the authors' correspondence.
• The editor of the Publishing House should treat with full seriousness any allegations of violation of the ethics of scientific research and publication ethics established at any stage of the publication process. The allegations should be initially assessed and the authors should be able to refer to them.
• Where allegations of violation of research ethics and publication ethics have been well documented, The editor should immediately suspend the publication process, and if the work has already appeared in print, it should be removed from the general area of access and inform the relevant databases in which the publication has been indexed. The editor is obliged to initiate legal procedures in relation to Authors who have committed violations of the ethics of scientific research and publication ethics.