Ethical principles

Editorial ethics

  1. The Editors of “Wiadomości Zootechniczne” assess the submitted articles in an impartial manner in terms of their scientific and intellectual value and correspondence with the profile of the journal – regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors.
  2. Editorial staff applies to the current legal status in the field of copyright, plagiarism and other intellectual property rights. It is responsible for the decision to publish articles.
  3. The editors strive to eliminate the cases of plagiarism, autoplagiarism, guest authorship and ghostwriting, which are manifestations of scientific misconduct. Therefore, we require the authors to disclose the names of all authors, including their affiliation and information about the significant contribution to the creation of the work. Any cases of their occurrence detected by the editorial staff will result in the rejection of work and disclosure, including notification of relevant entities (parent institutions of authors, scientific societies, associations of scientific editors).
  4. The editors ensure that every work is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers, qualified in a given area and affiliated in a different scientific unit than the one from which the author(s) of the work originate. The text positively evaluated by the reviewers is sent for publication. The reviewers and authors do not know their identity (double-blind peer review).
  5. The editors ensure that conflicts of interest and bias are prevented. We protect the confidentiality of all materials sent to the journal, unless otherwise agreed with the respective authors and reviewers.
  6. Unpublished materials from rejected works are in no way used by the editors.
  7. Editors do not take part in making decisions regarding articles they have written or co-authored.
  8. The editors adhere to the terms described in the Creative Commons 4.0 license.

Authors’ ethics

  1. Works submitted for publication should be written in accordance with the principles of scientific reliability and scientific ethics.
  2. The authors should provide a detailed description of the work done and an objective discussion about the research. The article should contain enough details and references to allow others to repeat the tests. Consciously inaccurate statements are unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
  3. The authors present completely original works, and places where they use research/ theses/fragments of other works, provide appropriate references and citations. If necessary, the authors obtain the appropriate consent. Oral relations, correspondence, private conversation, if they were sources of information, should also be included. Plagiarism in all its forms, also as a paraphrase, is unacceptable.
  4. The authors do not simultaneously submit the same articles or the results of the same research in several journals, because it is unethical.
  5. All those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, execution or interpretation of the study submitted should be listed as co-authors. Individuals who have participated in important aspects of the work, but are not mentioned as a co-author, should be honored in acknowledgments.
  6. All co-authors should be familiar with the final version of the work and agree to submit it for publication.
  7. Authors should carefully consider the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript for publication. Only in exceptional circumstances the editors may consider the addition, deletion or change of authors after submission of the manuscript, and the author must explicitly submit such a request to the editor.
  8. Authors take collective responsibility for work.
  9. In order to prevent cases of ghostwriting and guest authorship, the authors are obliged to provide information about the contribution to the creation of the work, affiliation of each author and sources of research funding. The authors have a detailed description of their participation in the work (who and in what part is the author of the concepts, assumptions, methods, etc.).
  10. Where necessary, the authors have appropriate permits from the Ethics Committee to conduct research.
  11. Authors who find an error in published research should immediately notify the editorial office.

Reviewers’ ethics

  1. Each scientific paper is evaluated by 2 reviewers – independent academics, specialists in the field. If the submitted work is not in the field in which the reviewer is competent, he should inform the editorial office.
  2. The authors and the reviewers are not informed about each other’s identity.
  3. The text of the received work should be treated as confidential.
  4. A reviewer who knows that he will not be able to meet the relevant deadline should inform the editors.
  5. The reviewer should be vigilant on ethical issues, taking into account every similarity to other work.
  6. The reviewer should evaluate the work in an objective manner, following the guidelines for the reviewers posted on the journal’s website.
  7. The reviewer should not review works on which there is a suspicion of a conflict of interest.