Publication ethics

The following section summarizes the principles of publication ethics, both from the perspective of the editorial board and the journal's executive editors, authors, reviewers, or publisher. The aim of these principles is to prevent possible illegal and unethical practices at all stages of the publication process at ProInflow.

By submitting a manuscript to a publisher, the author acknowledges that his/her manuscript is an original work that has not yet been published or sent to another publisher for review. The publisher considers any plagiarism, submission of identical or previously published manuscripts, misrepresentation and false statements about authorship and originality to be unethical and unacceptable. Unoriginal works and works that are plagiarized will not be published by the publisher.

The principles of publication ethics are based on sources from COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).

In the event that an issue is not explicitly addressed in these guidelines, the COPE supporting sources listed above or generally applicable ethical principles apply.

Peer-Review Process

Peer review is a process that ensures the quality of scholarly papers in the main peer-reviewed section of the ProInflow journal. Original scholarly survey articles and research papers are subject to a peer-review.

The executive editorial board decides upon consultation with the chief editor whether the peer-review process will be initiated for a particular text. If a submitted paper does not meet the set requirements, the executive editorial board may reject it prior to the peer-review process.

The peer-review process in ProInflow is completely anonymous. Each text is reviewed by two independent reviewers selected by the executive editorial board together with the chief editor. Reviewers from different institutions that are not members of the editorial board are considered. A reviewer must not have any work-related, institutional, or personal affiliation with the author(s).

Reviewers will in their independent review reports either recommend or not recommend a paper for publication, or they may make publication conditional on minor or more substantial revisions or may suggest that the paper be completely reworked. Where a complete reworking of the text is made, a new peer-review process is started. In the case of contradictory review reports, a third reviewer is invited to evaluate the paper.

Review reports are filled in a standardized form. The form is used for the evaluation of the reviewed paper in terms of its content, structure, and formal requirements. The review report contains information as to whether the paper is recommended or not recommended for publication in the ProInflow journal.

The decision on the publication of a paper is made on the basis of review reports. Where only minor revisions are suggested, the text is sent back to the author for reworking. The reviewer has in such a case the right to request the reworked paper for inspection. Acceptance of a paper for the peer-reviewed section is approved jointly by the editorial board and editor. Only the final version of a paper is published.

Rights and Duties of the Editorial Board

The primary responsibility of the editorial board is to supervise and control the scholarly quality of the journal.

The editorial board is also responsible for preventing conflicts of interest and ensuring equal opportunities for all authors.

The editorial board together with the chief editor suggest, approve or reject individual steps of the conceptual and formal development of the journal.

It is within the competence of the editorial board to give its opinion at any time during the entire peer-review process.

Rights and Duties of the Executive Editorial Board

The executive editors take care of the journal's operation and ensure communication with authors and reviewers.

The executive editors are guided by the recommendations of the Editorial Board in their work on the running of the journal.

They ensure the smooth functioning of the editorial system and are available to authors and reviewers in case of technical difficulties.

They ensure that the content of articles is treated as confidential before publication.

They are responsible for the quality and promptness of the peer-review process.

Rights and Duties of the Authors

Authors submit their original works for a peer-review process. Works that have been already published or slightly reworked papers should not be submitted.

They are responsible for complying with ethical principles of research work and publishing their results, in particular for compliance with research and citation ethics.

All authors of the paper are signed under the paper.

Other people co-operating on the research (who are not authors of the paper) may be also named in the article, typically in the Acknowledgement section.

Authors may state the sources of funding for their research.

They hold the copyright to the text. Unless otherwise stated, papers are published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 CZ license.

Rights and Duties of the Reviewers

Reviewers provide written unbiased feedback on the submitted text.

They evaluate the originality of the work, quality of resources and work with them, the contribution of the paper, and clear formulation of conclusions.

They respect the confidential nature of the peer-review process – they do not provide to third parties any running versions of the text before the publication of the paper.

They comply with the deadlines set by the editorial staff.

Rights and Duties of the Publisher

The publisher undertakes to prevent any conflict of interest, in particular influencing of the opinion of members of the editorial board. Full responsibility for the scholarly quality of the journal lies on the part of the editorial board, which has scholarly independence from the publisher.