The section is adapted from the files of Elsevier, a global provider of scientific, technical, and medical information, as well as from the files of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed journal is an easy way of scientific communication, and at the same time contributes to the development of the respective field of research. Thus, it is important to establish standards of expected ethical conduct by all parties involved in publishing—the Author, the Editor, the Peer Reviewer, the Publisher, and the society—for the journal Geology and Mineral Resources of Siberia.
1.2. The editorial staff of Geology and Mineral Resources of Siberia supports scientific communications and is responsible for ensuring that the current best practice is followed in its publications.
1.3. The Publisher undertakes a commitment to strictly supervise the scientific matter. The journal programmes are an impartial record of scientific thought and research, so all the parties involved are aware of their responsibility for proper representation of the record, and in particular in terms of ethical aspects of publications, set out in this document.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1. Publishing Decision
The Editor of Geology and Mineral Resources of Siberia shall be solely and independently responsible for making publishing decisions, often in cooperation with the Editorial Board. The decision of whether to publish a paper shall always be based on the reliability and integrity of the paper in question and its scientific merit. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the Editorial Board of Geology and Mineral Resources of Siberia, being constrained by applicable legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
The Editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or the Editorial Board members) in making publishing decisions.
2.2. Fair Play
The Editor shall evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious commitment, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political preferences of the Authors.
The Editor and any members of the Editorial Board of Geology and Mineral Resources of Siberia shall not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding Author, Peer Reviewers, potential Peer Reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the Publisher, as appropriate.
2.4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished data disclosed in a submitted manuscript shall not be used in the Editor’s own research without the author’s written consent. Information or ideas obtained through peer review shall be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
2.4.2. The Editors shall excuse themselves (i.e. ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the Editorial Board instead of independent reviewing and considering) from reviewing a manuscript if they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) other organisations connected to the manuscript.
2.5. Supervision over Publishing
The Editor who presented a convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous shall report to the Publisher (and/or the respective scientific society) to promptly introduce corrections, retract, express concern, or make other note as may be relevant.
2.6. Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations
The Editor shall take reasonable responsive measures if there are ethical complaints concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, together with the Publisher (or the Editorial Board). Such measures generally include contacting the Author of the manuscript and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claim made, but may also include further communications with the relevant organisations and research centres.
3. Duties of Reviewers
3.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions
The Peer Review assists the Editor in making editorial decisions on publishing and, by means of the respective communication with the Author, may also assist the Author in improving the paper. The Peer Review is an essential component of formal scientific communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. The Publisher shares the view of many that all scientists who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible shall notify the Editor of Geology and Mineral Resources of Siberia and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review shall be treated as a confidential document. They shall not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the Editor.
3.4. Standard and Objectivity
The peer reviews shall be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the Author is inappropriate. The Peer Reviewers shall express their views clearly and with supporting arguments.
3.5. Acknowledgement of Sources
The Peer Reviewers shall identify relevant published papers that have not been cited by the Author. Any statement of an observation, conclusion, or argument reported previously shall be accompanied by the relevant reference. The Peer Reviewer shall also report to the Editor any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
3.6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
3.6.1. Unpublished data disclosed in a submitted manuscript shall not be used in the Editor’s own research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained through peer review shall be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
3.6.2. The Editors shall not review a manuscript if they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the Authors, companies, or other organisations connected to the manuscript.
4. Duties of Authors
4.1. Reporting Standards
4.1.1. The Authors of original research reports shall present the actual outcome of work as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data shall be represented accurately in the paper. The paper shall contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical conduct and are unacceptable.
4.1.2. Overviews and research papers shall also be accurate and objective, and the editorial opinion shall be clearly identified as such.
4.2. Data Access and Retention
The Authors may be asked to provide raw data in connection with a paper submitted for editorial review. The Authors shall be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and shall in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
4.3. Originality and Plagiarism
4.3.1. The Authors shall ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the Authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, from taking other’s work for the Author’s own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of other’s paper (without referencing), to claiming results of research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing conduct and is unacceptable.
4.4. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
4.4.1. The Author shall not publish a manuscript describing essentially the same research in more than one journal as a primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing conduct and is unacceptable.
4.4.2. In general, the Author shall not submit to another journal a previously published paper.
4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of papers (e.g. clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The Authors and Editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation as in the primary publication. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
4.5. Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be given. The Authors shall cite publications that have influenced the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, shall not be used or reported without explicit written consent from the source. Information obtained from confidential sources, such as reviewing manuscripts or issuing grants, shall not be used without the explicit written consent of the Author of the work related to the confidential sources mentioned.
4.6. Authorship of the Paper
4.6.1. Authorship shall be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the work submitted. All those who have made a significant contribution shall be listed as Co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantial aspects of the research project, they shall be acknowledged or listed as Contributors.
4.6.2. The Author shall ensure that all appropriate Co-authors and no inappropriate Co-authors are mentioned, and that all Co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
4.7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
4.7.1. All Authors shall disclose in their manuscript any financial or other conflicts of interest that might be construed as having influenced the results or interpretation of their work.
4.7.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest to be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert opinion, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest shall be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.
4.8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When the Author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the Author’s responsibility to promptly notify the Editor of Geology and Mineral Resources of Siberia and cooperate with the Publisher to retract or correct the paper. If the Editor or the Publisher learn from a third party that a published paper contains significant errors, the Author shall promptly retract or correct the paper.
5. Duties of the Publisher
5.1. The Publisher shall adopt policies and procedures that support Editors, Reviewers and Authors of Geology and Mineral Resources of Siberia in performing their ethical duties under these requirements. The Publisher shall ensure that the potential profit from advertising or reprint has had no impact on editorial decisions.
5.2. The Publisher shall support the Editors of Geology and Mineral Resources of Siberia in the review of ethical complaints and further communication with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to the Editors.
5.3. The Publisher shall develop best practice in research activities and introduce industry ethical standards and procedures for retraction and correction of errors.
5.4. The Publisher shall provide required legal support and counselling, if necessary.