ETHICAL STANDARDS OF PUBLICATIONS AND AN ABUSE PREVENTION POLICY IN PUBLISHING PRACTICE IN THE JOURNAL "SAFE BANK"

The Publisher, Editorial Board, Editorial Committee and the Program and Scientific Council of "Safe Bank" apply ethical standards of publishing and a policy of preventing abuse in publishing practice, based on the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics ((The Committee on Publication Ethics, COPE) and the Code of Ethics for Researchers (developed by the Committee for Ethics in Science.

Responsibilities of the Program and Scientific Council, Editorial Committee and Editorial Board

The Publisher, the Program and Scientific Council, the Editorial Committee and the Editorial Board strive to improve the journal. They act respecting the freedom of speech, while ensuring honesty and independence from external influences on published content. Editors and the Editorial Committee are responsible for the scientific level of materials published in the Safe Bank magazine. Editors should follow the policy of the journal and comply with copyright requirements. Editors may consult with other editors and reviewers in deciding whether to accept, refer for revision, or reject an article. The evaluation of articles sent to the Editorial Office is made by the editors in a fair and impartial manner, in terms of substantive value, originality and topicality of the content and compliance with the journal's profile.
It is the editor's duty to ensure an objective and good-practice article evaluation process. The requirements for authors and the rules for reviewing articles are open and posted on the journal's website. The Editorial Committee strives to ensure a high substantive level of articles, and when necessary, it includes corrections, clarifications or apologies, and should immediately make corrections if significant errors were found in the article after its publication. The journal provides an opportunity to discuss the article after its publication; it can take the form of a discussion article, a review article, a letter to the editor, etc. In the case of publication of the results of research on personal characteristics, editors and reviewers should assess the ethical aspect of conducting these studies. The editors may not disclose any information about the submitted material to anyone other than the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, members of the Editorial Committee and the Publisher. Information about authors is not disclosed to reviewers, information about reviewers is not disclosed to authors. In the event of irregularities or violations of ethical principles or good practices by the author, reviewer, editor or editors, the Editorial Committee of Safe Bank or its Program and Scientific Council should take appropriate corrective and disciplinary actions.

Responsibilities of Authors

A study submitted to the Safe Bank Research journal, containing the research results of the author or authors, should meet the standards of honesty and responsibility, and the research itself should be conducted in compliance with the law and the principles of scientific ethics.The authors are to blame:
- present the results of their research in an honest and reliable manner, not committing plagiarism, falsification or fabrication of results,
- strive for a clear, understandable and unambiguous description of the methods used so that their results can be verified by others,
- ensure that the submitted study is original, does not duplicate the content of other publications and has not been published or submitted for publication anywhere else.

If the work of another author or authors has been used in the study, they should be appropriately cited or cited. The author alone and the authors are collectively responsible for the studies submitted for publication. The authorship of the work should accurately reflect the contribution of the person or individuals to the preparation of the work. Authorship should be limited to those people who have made a significant contribution to the development of the concept, structure, analysis or research, and finally to the interpretation of the results contained in the content Other people who contributed to the creation of the article (e.g. participated in some stages of the research project, participated in discussions on the methodology, evaluation of results or their interpretation) should be indicated as persons cooperating or supporting the research (e.g. in the form of acknowledgments). The lead author (or corresponding author) should ensure that all co-authors of the article are listed and that all co-authors have read and approved the submitted version of the paper and consented to its publication. Ghostwriting (applies to the case when someone made a significant contribution to the creation of the article, but this person was not indicated as a co-author or their role was not mentioned in the acknowledgments in the publication), guest authorship or honorary authorship (applies to the case when someone was indicated as the author or co-author of the publication but the participation of this person is negligible or did not take place at all) will be treated as manifestations of scientific misconduct and considered as violation of ethical principles. Authors are obliged to inform about a potential conflict of interest that may affect the content of the study, research results or their interpretation or their reception by readers. The authors should indicate the sources of research funding, the results of which are presented in the study. In the event that the Author notices significant errors or inaccuracies in his own study that has been published, it is his duty to immediately notify the Editorial Board or the Editor-in-Chief and cooperate in order to withdraw the article or remove or correct the error.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers' duties include:
- refrain from reviewing the study in the event of a conflict of interest and informing the Editor-in-Chief or the Editorial Board of a potential conflict,
- withdrawal from the review process of the article if they consider that they do not have the appropriate scientific competence or cannot prepare a review within the proposed or agreed deadline.
When evaluating the study, the reviewers should maintain objectivity, reliability, meticulousness and honesty. The task of the reviewers is to support the Editorial Board in making decisions about publication, submission for correction or rejection of the reviewed paper. A review can help the author improve the article. Comments and opinions contained in the review should be factual and justified. Personal criticism of the Author is undesirable. Reviewers should notify the Editorial Board or the Editor-in-Chief of any circumstance that may be the basis for not accepting the article for publication. In particular, they are obliged to report suspected abuse, infringement of copyright or violation of ethical principles. Reviewers should identify published sources that have not been cited by the Authors and report to the Editors any significant similarities or duplications between the reviewed study and other publications known to them. Reviewers may not use concepts, data, information, arguments, etc., or interpretations that they become familiar with during the review of the paper for their own benefit or needs, unless they obtain the author's consent. Without the consent of the Editorial Committee, they may not disclose the content of the study to third parties and may not discuss it with other people before publishing it in the Safe Bank or other journal.

Reviewers should keep their opinions confidential at least until the publication of the reviewed paper.

Downloadable ETHICAL STANDARDS