The Journal of Food Processing: Techniques and Technology is guided by the principles of publication ethics based on the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (Elsevier), and the Decree on Ethical Principles of Scientific Publications issued by the Association of Science Editors and Publishers.
All those involved in the publishing process (the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the editorial office) are to observe the abovementioned codes of publication ethics.
1. DUTIES OF THE PUBLISHER
The policy of the Journal is based on respect for the individual rights of the author and intellectual property rights.
The publisher ensures independent and conscientious consideration of all submitted manuscripts, without prejudice against ethnic, religious, or social status of their authors and regardless of commercial interests and relations with the founder.
The publisher shall work to ensure and improve the quality of published materials and meet the needs of readers and authors to make a significant contribution to the development of food science and related areas.
Our editorial principles involve relevance, importance, clarity, reliability, and validity of the published research material. Credibility, reproducibility, uniqueness, fullness, balance, and transparency are the main indicators of quality of the publications.
The publisher strives to attract and recruit highly qualified professionals who can contribute to the development of the Journal.
The publisher shall constantly improve the processes of reviewing and editing.
The publisher shall guarantee that all submitted manuscripts are checked for image manipulation, plagiarism, and duplicate or redundant publications.
The publisher shall take all necessary measures in case of conflict and publish improvements, clarifications, refutations, and apologies if necessary.
2. DUTIES OF THE EDITORIAL OFFICE
The editorial office publishes information for authors, including the formatting requirements, submission and review procedures.
The editorial office ensures independent and conscientious consideration of all submitted manuscripts, without prejudice against ethnic, religious, or social status of their authors and regardless of any commercial interests and relations with the publisher.
The editorial office has the right to reject a badly written manuscript that does not meet the formatting requirements or contains evidence of slander, plagiarism, or copyright infringement. The final decision on the publication of an article or refusal of such is taken by the editor-in-chief and is fair and unprejudiced.
Manuscripts submitted to the editorial office are checked for borrowings from open sources (plagiarism). The check is carried out through the Internet resources (www.antiplagiat.ru and https://crosscheck.ithenticate.com). Should multiple unauthorized borrowings be detected, the editorial office follows the COPE algorithm.
The editorial office ensures confidentiality, which means that the submitted manuscript cannot be demonstrated to anyone other than the respective authors, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
The editorial office ensures that the materials of the rejected manuscript will not be used in the board members’ own research without the written consent of the author.
The editorial office shall promptly examine each complaint about any possible unethical behavior of the authors of submitted and published articles and undertake appropriate measures. Should the unethical behaviour be proved, the editorial office has the right to refuse to publish the article, cease further cooperation with the author, publish a retraction, or take other necessary measures to further curb unethical behavior of the author in question.
Should an error be detected, amendments shall be provided as soon as possible. When the online version of the article is corrected, it is provided with the correction date and a reference to the errata published.
3. DUTIES OF AUTHORS
Authors guarantee that the manuscript they submit meets the formatting requirements, including those for the illustrative material (http://fptt.ru/eng/?page=requirements).
Authors guarantee that the submitted manuscript contains authentic results that have never been published and are not being reviewed by other journals.
Deliberately erroneous or forged data and conclusions are unacceptable.
Authors are free to post the initial draft of their manuscript on such public preprint servers as bioRxiv, arXiv, or in the related repository. In this case they should inform the Journal about it and provide a link to the preprint. However, they cannot post their article on preprint servers if it has already been published by the Journal or improved to meet the requirements of the editorial board or reviewers, as it might be regarded as a duplicate publication. When citing an article published in the Journal, please make sure that the link leads to the official page of the article on the Journal's website.
Authors are required to refer to other studies as correctly and accurately as possible by specifying the original source in the references. A word-for-word citation or periphrasis of the author’s own publications is unacceptable: they can only be used as a basis for new findings.
Authors must follow the applicable laws on copyright protection. Materials protected by copyright, e.g. tables, figures, or large citations, may be reproduced only with the permission of their respective owners.
Authors cannot copy references from other publications if they are not familiar with the original source. Quotes and references must be accurate and formatted in accordance with the requirements.
Authors ensure that the list of authors includes only those individuals who have made significant contributions to the work, and that no researcher deserving authorship has been excluded from the list of authors.
In determining the authorship and contributorship, the editorial office follows the authorship criteria developed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE):
In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work he or she has done, an author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for other parts of the work. Authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors.
All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged. These authorship criteria are intended to reserve the status of authorship for those who deserve credit and can take responsibility for the work. The criteria are not intended for use as a means to disqualify colleagues from authorship who otherwise meet authorship criteria by denying them the opportunity to meet criterion No. 2 or 3. Therefore, all individuals who meet the first criterion should have the opportunity to participate in the review, drafting, and final approval of the manuscript.
The corresponding author shall guarantee that all the co-authors have seen the final version of the manuscript, approved it, and agreed to its submission for publication in the Journal.
Authors must disclose any conflicts of interests that could affect the evaluation and interpretation of their manuscript.
The sources of financial support for the project (grants, state programs, projects, etc.) are to be indicated in the manuscript.
Authors are required to immediately notify the editorial office in the event of an error in any work filed by them for publication, accepted for publication, or already published, and contribute to its correction. Should the editorial office be informed about an error by third parties, the authors are to promptly correct the error or justify it.
Authors retain exclusive rights to the published material, which is marked with Copyright © on the title page of the Journal.
All papers published in the Journal fall under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC BY 4.0). The online version of the Journal is published in open assess, which means that you are free to read, download, copy, forward, print, and make reference to the complete texts provided you mention the author’s name.
4. DUTIES OF THE EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
The editor-in-chief promotes the Journal, improves the quality of published materials, meets the needs of readers and authors, and contributes to the development of food science and related areas.
The editor-in-chief uses the following criteria to accept a manuscript for publication: compliance with the profile of the Journal; relevance, novelty, and significance; clarity of presentation; reliability of results and completeness of conclusions. The decision is based on all the comments provided by independent reviewers. The main criteria are the quality of research and its relevance.
The editor-in-chief (in his absence – deputy editor-in-chief) shall guarantee an independent and conscientious consideration of all manuscripts without ethnic, religious, or social prejudice and regardless of any commercial interests or relations with the founder or publisher.
Manuscripts are private property of their authors and cannot be subject to disclosure. They cannot be used for personal purposes or transferred to third parties without the written consent of the author.
The editor-in-chief (in his absence – deputy editor-in-chief) has the right to reject the publication with evidence of slander, insult, plagiarism, or copyright infringement.
The editor-in-chief (in his absence – deputy editor-in-chief) selects independent experienced reviewers with no conflict of interest.
The editor-in-chief (in his absence – deputy editor-in-chief) shall decide on the acceptance or rejection of an article for publication on the basis of all the comments provided by independent reviewers. The final editorial decision and the reasons for its adoption are reported to the authors. The editorial office shall take all necessary measures in case of conflict.
5. DUTIES OF REVIEWERS
The expert evaluation of the manuscript promotes the adoption of editorial decisions and also helps the author improve the manuscript. Based on the reviews, the editor-in-chief (in his absence – deputy editor-in-chief) makes a decision to accept the manuscript for publication, return it to the author for revision, or reject it.
To be published, a manuscript has to be recommended by two independent reviewers appointed by the editor-in-chief (in his absence – deputy editor-in-chief). The double blind peer review can be conducted by the members of the editorial board or by acknowledged academic experts (doctors, professors) in the area of research who have had recent publications on the related topic.
Reviewing is strictly confidential. A breach of confidentiality is unacceptable unless the reviewer reports unreliability or counterfeiting of the material.
Reviewers guarantee a confidential, independent, honest, and objective review of all manuscripts. The reviewer has the right to reject a manuscript before the review stage if it has been found to be of poor quality or does not meet the requirements of the Journal. This decision is made fairly and impartially.
Reviewers shall provide a review within the time specified by the editors or notify the editor if the deadline is impossible.
Reviewers shall provide an objective peer review. All the conclusions of the reviewer should be strictly provided with links to authoritative sources. Personal criticism of author by the reviewer is unacceptable. In such cases, the Editors follow the COPE protocole.
Should the reviewer detect that the manuscript was based on other studies which the author failed to mention in the references, the reviewer shall inform the editor about it. Reviewers are obliged to inform the editor about any resemblance or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and other previously published research.
Reviewers have no right to use unpublished manuscript materials in their own research without the written consent of the author.
Reviewers cannot examine the manuscript if they find themselves unqualified or biased, or in case a conflict of interests arises because of competitive, cooperative, or other relationship with the author or organization related to the manuscript.
If the reviewer raises an issue of data accuracy or the rationale for publication, the author is given an opportunity to respond.Independent peer reviewers are informed about the requirements or any changes in the editorial policy.
The editorial office shall not reveal any personal data concerning the reviewers.
6. CORRECTION POLICY
The editorial office allows its authors to correct mistakes, typographical errors, or other inaccuracies after their manuscript has been published.
Should you find an error, misprint, or any other inaccuracy in your published article, do not hesitate to inform the Editors.
The Editorial Board is ready to make the following types of correction:
Addendum is published in case some important information, data, or results were unintentionally omitted from the article, i.e. author's affiliation, grant number, funding, research subject or method, etc.
The Addendum is an Appendix to the published article, which informs about the missing information. The Addendum is published in the printed and digital versions of the current issue with the article number added. The original article is not changed, but acquires a hyperlink to the Addendum.
Erratum is a correction of formatting or other unscientific change to something that causes ambiguity, hinders understanding or prevents correct citing, e.g. spelling or factual error in the title or author's name, affiliation, e-mail, etc., missing or fuzzy figures, missing or misspelled words; a typo in the formula or in its explanation, etc. The Erratum is made in the digital version, and a message about the Erratum is published on the website and in the current printed issue. Minor errors that do not hinder the meaning or understanding are not corrected, and no Erratum is published.
Corrections are changes that may affect the scientific interpretation, e.g. incorrect data, extra text, wrong information in equations, conclusions, etc. These changes are evaluated by the Reviewer, and the final decision on making Corrections belongs to the Chief Editor. The Corrections are published in the current issue as a separate publication with a reference to the original article. The original article is not modified, but acquires a hyperlink to the Correction.
Retraction of a published article is considered to be the last resort in case previously unknown facts were revealed after the review stage. In this case, the editorial office follows the COPE algorithm and the Decree issued by the Association of Science Editors and Publishers.
Retraction can be initiated by authors, readers, reviewers, editors, and other publishers by appealing to the editorial office.
Should the publication ethics be violated by the publisher, editorial office, the editor-in-chief, reviewers, or authors, an investigation is required. This applies to both published and unpublished materials.