Editorial policies

Principles of professional ethics in the activities of the editor and publisher

The work of the editor responsible for the publication of copyright works, which imposes the necessity of passing the following fundamental principles:

  • when deciding on publishing editor of scientific journal is guided reliably view and scientific value of the work under consideration.
  • editor should evaluate manuscripts intellectual content regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, origin, nationality, social status or political affiliation of authors.
  • unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts should not be used for personal purposes or transferred to third parties without the written consent of the author. Information or ideas received during editing and related to possible benefits should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
  • editor must prevent manuscripts from plgiarism that is realised by IT program unplag.com.
  • editor, in conjunction with the publisher, should not unresponsive claims related to the manuscripts or published material in question, as well as when the conflict situation is identified, take the necessary steps to restore the infringed rights.

Ethical foundations in the work of the reviewer

Reviewer provides scientific expertise copyright material, so that its actions should be impartial in nature, which is subject to the following principles:

  • manuscripts for review must be treated as a confidential document that can not be transferred for review or discussion with third parties, which do not have that authority from the editors.
  • reviewer is obliged to objectively and reasonably evaluate the results of the research. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
  • unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration should not be used by the reviewer for personal purposes.
  • reviewer who does not possess, in his opinion, sufficient qualifications to evaluate the manuscript, or may not be objective, for example, because of a conflict of interest with the author or organization, must notify the editorial board with a request to postpone him from reviewing this manuscript.

Principles to guide the author of scientific publications

Author (or collective of authors) is aware that he is personally responsible for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research, which presupposes compliance with such principles:

  • author / authors of the article should submit reliable results of the research. Mistaken or falsified results are considered inappropriate.
  • authors must ensure that the results of the research presented in the given manuscript are completely original. The borrowed fragments or statements must be made with the obligatory indication of the author and the original source. Excessive borrowings, as well as plagiarism in all forms, including unformed citations, rephrasing or assigning rights to the results of others' research, are unethical and unacceptable.
  • it is necessary to acknowledge the contribution of all persons who in one way or another influenced the course of research; in particular, references should be given in the article to the works that were important in conducting the research.
  • authors should not submit to the journal a manuscript, previously sent to another journal, or a manuscript under consideration, or an article published in another journal.
  • co-authors of the article should be indicated by all persons who have made a significant contribution to the research. Among co-authors it is unacceptable to indicate those who did not participate in the study.
  • co-authors of the article should be indicated by all persons who have made a significant contribution to the research. Among co-authors it is unacceptable to indicate those who did not participate in the study.



Editorial Procedures and Peer-review

Each paper is subject to a review. By submitting a manuscript to the Editorial Board, authors agree to the review process.

All submitted manuscripts are checked to determine whether they fit the scope of the journal, follow the ethical policies and are properly prepared. Manuscripts with insufficient originality or lack of significant message, as well as if they are not prepared as per journals instructions will be rejected or returned to the authors for revision and resubmission.

After a preliminary assessment and acceptance of the subject of the paper as compliant with the profile of the journal, the paper is registered and the register number is handed over to the authors.

The manuscripts which are found suitable for publication are sent for double-blind review (authors’ identities are unknown to reviewers and vice versa). The comments and suggestions received from reviewers are conveyed to the corresponding author. If required, the author is requested to provide a point by point response to reviewers’ comments and submit a revised version of the manuscript. This process is repeated till reviewers and editors are satisfied with the manuscript.

Based on the comments and advice of reviewers the Editorial Board takes a decision to accept, reject or forward the manuscript to alternative reviewer. The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief.

Once accepted, the manuscript will undergo professional copy-editing, English editing, proofreading by the authors, final corrections, pagination and publication.

Peer review form of each manuscript of "Measuring Equipment and Metrology" issue is attached below.

reviewform.doc40 KB