ETHICAL PRINCIPLES
on copyright materials
published in the monthly magazine
„Building Materials”
(based on guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics – COPE)

”Materiały Budowlane” monthly respects and promotes the principles of publishing ethics. Being guided by COPE’s Guidelines
( https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines)
we ensure that all participants of the publishing process comply with these rules

„Materiały Budowlane” as a scientific journal is obliged to take actions to observe ethical principles in scientific publications, publish high-quality scientific articles, ensure the highest editorial standards, and respond to any manifestations of scientific misconduct and unethical behaviour in science. Any detected manifestations of scientific misconduct and unethical demeanour will be documented and disclosed, including notification of relevant entities (e.g. institutions employing authors, scientific societies, editorial offices of other journals). Ethical compliance is expected of all participants in the publication process: authors, editors, reviewers and publishers.

Responsibilities of Editorial Office

1) The Editorial Office evaluates submitted scientific article objectively and fairly, without discrimination of the authors based on race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, political beliefs, ethnicity and geographical origin. It makes its decisions solely on the basis of the content of the analysed material, taking into account its originality, scientific value, clarity of presented issues, importance of research or information to the scientific and technical community in a given field.

2) The Editorial Office treats all the received materials from the Authors as confidential and does not provide information about them to people who are not directly involved in the publication process (other authors, editors, reviewers, etc.), and does not use them in the Editorial Office’s own scientific activity without written consent of the Authors.

3)The Editorial Office enables publication of negative research results.

4) In the event that a scientific article has been criticised on the pages of the journal, the Editorial Office enables its Authors to publish a substantive polemic related to the criticised part of the article.

5) The Editorial Office pays special attention to the effective legal requirements regarding the compliance of copyrights.

Responsibilities of the Reviewer

The process of reviewing a scientific article is intended to support the Executive Editor and the Editorial Office in deciding to publish it in the journal and, if necessary, indicate to the Authors those elements in their work that need to be corrected or supplemented.

1) The Reviewer should objectively assess whether he or she can undertake a review of a scientific article, taking into account its substantive content and the time frame indicated by the Editorial Office.

2) The Reviewer treats all materials received from the Editorial Office as confidential and without the Editorial Office’s consent, can not pass any information about them to third parties, and shall not use them in his or her own scientific activities without the written consent of the Authors.

3) The review should be prepared as objectively and clearly as possible, with an unambiguous recommendation, and critical comments supported by specific arguments, without personal references.

4) If the content of a high degree similarity to the content of other publications that the Reviewer knows is found in the article, the Reviewer should inform the Editorial Office about this fact.

Responsibilities of the Author

1) The Author sends to the Editorial Office only original works, not previously published in other magazines, and declares that he has the right to dispose of these materials. It is unacceptable to submit articles to several journals at the same time.

2) The article should take into account the current state of knowledge in a given field and be prepared according to the Editorial Office’s guidelines, in particular regarding the proper citation of sources (IEEE format). The methods and results of the research should be presented in a clear and legible manner, allowing the process of the Author’s conduct to be traced and enable possible repetition of the research by other researchers. In the event of earlier publication of partial results, the Author should inform the Editorial Office of this fact and include the relevant information in the article.

3) The author declares that the research data used in the publication has not been manipulated or falsified, and also – in justified cases, that the research has been carried out in compliance with the ethical and formal rules applicable in a given field of science (e.g. approval of the bioethics committee).

4) The author should store the source of the research data in order to make them available at the request of the Editorial Office or authorised institutions.

5) All persons who made a significant contribution to the article (concept, assumptions, methods and research, interpretation of results, preparation of the manuscript, literature search) must be listed as co-authors along with their affiliation. The Author submitting the article is responsible for this. It is unacceptable to indicate as the author (co-author) a person whose contribution to the creation of the publication did not take place. The Author submitting the article should disclose the contribution of individual authors to the publication and make sure that all co-authors agree to submit the article to the journal and accept its final version before printing.

6) The author should notify the Editorial Office of significant errors in his publication and lead to their correction or rectification.

7) The author should provide information about the sources of financing the publication, the contribution of research institutions, associations and other entities (financial disclosure) and about any conflicts of interest that may be related to the publication of the article.

Proceedings in the event of scientific misconduct and unethical practices

If the Editorial Office, Reviewer or Readers find the possibility of misconduct in a submitted or published scientific article, in particular related to the phenomenon of plagiarism, „ghostwriting” or „guest authorship”, the Editorial Office will undertake explanatory actions. First, the Editorial Office asks the Authors of the work to comment on the allegations. Confirmed cases of plagiarism or dishonesty violating the principles of ethics entitle the Editorial Office to further actions, such as, inter alia, publishing information about the detected misconduct and notifying entities with which the Author is affiliated.