Publication Ethics

Journal of Railway Transport and Technology Issues is a peer-reviewed journal. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer, and the publisher. The following is a code of conduct for writers, reviewers and editors of the Journal of Railway Transport and Technology adopted from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The code of ethics contains scientific principles in the field of research and publication that must be adhered to.

For Author
1. Reporting Standards:
Authors must present an accurate report of the work done as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The data underlying the research must be represented clearly and accurately. A paper must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work.
2. Data Access and Retention:
If authors are requested to provide raw data with respect to a paper for editorial review, then authors should be prepared to provide public access to such data, at a minimum the authors retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
3. Originality and Plagiarism:
The writing must be the result of his own work, and if the author has used the work and/or words of another person, the author must include a description of the citation and source.
4. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications:
An author may not publish a manuscript describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or major publication.
5. Reliable sources:
The author must give true acknowledgment of the work of others through citations
6. Author and involvement in writing:
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, conduct, or interpretation of the reported research. All who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they must be recognized or listed as contributors. Appropriate authors must ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the journal and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the journal and have approved its submission for publication.
7. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:
Authors must disclose in their manuscripts any other substantive conflict of interest or finances that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
8. Fundamental errors in published work:
If there are significant errors or inaccuracies in a published journal, authors are expected to immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and work closely with the editor to retract or correct the journal.
9. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects:
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

For Editors
1. Fair:
Editors must be fair when evaluating manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors.
2. Confidentiality:
Editors and editorial staff must not disclose confidentiality about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the appropriate author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and publishers, as appropriate.
3. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:
Material disclosed in submitted manuscripts that are not published may not be used in the editor's own research without the written consent of the author.
4. Publication Decision:
The journal's editorial board is responsible for deciding which articles to submit to publishers. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive such decisions. Editors may be guided by the discretion of the journal's editorial board and limited by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
5. Manuscript Review:
Editors must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. Editors must regulate and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors must describe their peer review process in information to authors and also indicate which sections of the journal the peer reviewed. Editors should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers being considered for publication by selecting persons with adequate expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

For Reviewer
1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions:
Peer reviews assist editors in making editorial decisions and editorial communication with authors can also assist authors in improving the quality of the journal.
2. Accuracy:
Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript, the reviewer must notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
3. Objectivity Standards:
The review must be carried out objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
4. Confidentiality:
Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. They may not be shown or discussed with others except as permitted by the editor.
5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:
Confidential information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest arising from competition, collaboration, relationship, or other connection with the author, company, or any institution to which the paper is connected.
6. Source Acknowledgment:
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported must be accompanied by a relevant citation. The reviewer should also call the editor's attention to any similarity in substance or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper that contains personal information.