Publication Ethics Guidelines Applied in the Journal

„Progress on Chemistry and Application of Chitin and its Derivatives”

The publication ethics principles adopted by PCACD are aimed at preventing unethical publishing practices and are in line with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Publication ethics principles applicable to the Publisher and the Editor-in-Chief:

1. The aim of the journal is to disseminate nationally and internationally the knowledge related to research and applications of chitin, chitosan, and their derivatives in all fields of science and life. This goal is achieved by publishing peer-reviewed scientific articles contributing significantly to the development of science.
2. All articles submitted for publication are reviewed before appearing in print.
3. The Editor-in-Chief selects reviewers based on their expertise, scientific achievements, and credibility in reviewing.
4. The acceptance of manuscripts for publication is based on reviewers’ opinions concerning the originality and creative presentation of the subject, conclusions, timeliness of research methods, topic selection, cited literature, and accuracy of the scientific content.
5. The Publisher prevents conflicts of interest that may arise due to relationships (family, social, professional) between the author of the work and the reviewer.
6. The Publisher uses all available means to prevent plagiarism and publication of falsified data.
7. The Publisher prevents negative practices such as ghostwriting (omitting individuals who contributed to the publication from the authorship list) and guest authorship (attributing authorship to persons who did not participate in the creation of the work).
8. The Publisher documents any manifestations of scientific misconduct, especially breaches of ethics in science, and all detected cases will be reported to the employing institutions of the Authors and other relevant institutions.
9. The Publisher and Editors may, during the editorial process (before publication), introduce corrections through discussion.
10. The Editorial Office reserves the right to make textual corrections without informing Authors and Readers. This applies only to minor changes such as formatting and spelling improvements which do not affect the content or interpretation.
11. The Editorial Office supports open access policies. The journal is published in open access, meaning all content is freely available for users and institutions. All articles are published electronically. The Editorial Office aims to archive articles in various databases.
12. The Editorial Office encourages Authors to archive research data in open research data repositories. The Editorial Office does not require Authors to submit research data. However, in selected cases the Editorial Office may request such data (e.g., issues regarding data integrity or duplication).
13. The Publisher respects the Authors’ moral rights, especially the right to authorship, and protects the reputation of the Authors and the work.
14. The Publisher maintains an independent and impartial publishing policy.
15. The Publisher ensures a reliable and professional publishing and editorial process.
16. The Publisher adheres to high editorial standards.
17. The Publisher ensures confidentiality and security in the processing of personal data.

Ethical guidelines for Authors:

1. An author is considered an individual who meets the authorship criteria: (a) made a significant contribution to the concept, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; (b) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; (c) approved the final version of the article and agreed to its submission for publication. All individuals who contributed significantly but do not meet all authorship criteria should not be listed as authors but acknowledged in the “Acknowledgements” section. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission.
2. Changes to authorship or author order in unpublished manuscripts require the consent of all Authors and the Editor-in-Chief, accompanied by an explanation for such changes.
3. Authors must submit original work that does not involve any form of plagiarism (appropriation of someone else’s work, data, or ideas without proper attribution) or self-plagiarism (duplicate publication of one’s own previously published work).
4. Authors submit a declaration that the manuscript is original, prepared independently, has not been previously published, and does not infringe the rights of third parties.
5. Materials created by others must be properly acknowledged.
6. All publications used in preparing the manuscript must be cited in the reference list.
7. Authors must disclose any conflicts of interest that may influence the results or their interpretation. All funding sources must be disclosed.
8. Authors are required to actively participate in the peer-review process, providing raw data, explanations, verification of ethical approvals, patient consent where applicable, and copyright permissions. If revisions are required, Authors should respond within the specified timeframe and resubmit within the deadline.
9. Authors may, during the editorial process (before publication), introduce corrections through discussion.
10. Texts submitted by Authors are published based on royalty-free publishing licenses granted to the Publisher. Failure to submit the license statement prevents publication.
11. The Author warrants that the copyrights licensed to the Publisher are not subject to third-party claims and that use of the work by the Publisher will not infringe personal or legal rights of third parties.
12. When Authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published article, they must immediately inform the Editorial Office.

Ethical guidelines for Reviewers

1. Individuals invited to review must assess their expertise and ability to complete the review within the requested timeframe, and decline if they are not confident they can do so properly.
2. Reviewers must complete reviews within the agreed deadline. If unexpected difficulties arise, the Publisher should be informed immediately.
3. Reviewers should decline the review if conflicts of interest exist or may be perceived.
4. Reviewers must thoroughly evaluate the manuscript and strive to assess it honestly and objectively.
5. The following criteria are considered in the peer-review process: originality and scientific nature of the manuscript; clarity in presenting the research problem; appropriate use of literature; adequate justification of statements and conclusions; compliance with formal and scientific standards as described in the “Instructions for Authors”.
6. Reviewers must not disclose information about submitted manuscripts to unauthorized persons (except those involved in the review process). Research results, data, opinions, or statements in a manuscript may not be used for personal research until publication.
7. Reviewers may, during the editorial process (before publication), propose corrections through discussion.

Plagiarism prevention and detection

1. Plagiarism in all forms is unethical and unacceptable.
2. If plagiarism is suspected, the Journal Editorial Office applies a verification procedure involving reviewers and the submitting author. If plagiarism is confirmed, the author will be notified in writing of the rejection of the manuscript.
3. In cases of self-plagiarism where previously published content is reused, the Editorial Office notifies the author of refusal due to lack of originality.

Prevention of “ghostwriting” and “guest authorship”

1. The Editorial Office requires Authors and Co-authors to specify the type of contribution each of them made to the work.

Use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools by the Publisher, Editorial Office, and Authors

1. The Publisher and Editorial Office do not submit the manuscript or any part of it to generative AI tools that could compromise confidentiality, authors’ rights, or data privacy.
2. Tools such as ChatGPT and other large language models (LLM) do not meet authorship criteria and therefore cannot be listed as authors.
3. Editors do not use generative artificial intelligence or AI-assisted technologies in the evaluation or decision-making process. The Editor/Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the editorial process, final decisions, and communication with authors.
4. Authors may use generative artificial intelligence and AI-assisted technologies in drafting before submission only to improve language and readability, and must appropriately disclose such use in accordance with the “Instructions for Authors”.