Publication ethics and publication malpractice statement
Book of Proceedings (International ergonomics conference) with the ISSN 1848-9699 is a peer reviewed conference proceedings in “Ergonomics” series of Conferences that have been organized since 2001 by the Croatian Ergonomics Society.
The duties and responsibilities of the authors, reviewers, editors and the publisher are in compliance with the principles of the COPE – Committee on Publication Ethics, COPE Council, Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers. September 2017. Information adopted and available at: https://publicationethics.org
Publication/processing charges/open access
The Book of Proceedings of the International Ergonomics Conference has been published by the Croatian Ergonomics Society every three years since 2001, while from 2016 has started its publication for every two years as a result of the successfully organised International Ergonomics Conferences.
Manuscripts submitted for the International Ergonomics Conference Proceedings undergo a peer review procedure and after acceptance the authors are asked to cover article processing charges or Conference registration fee (information available on the Conference website and updated every two years).
The Book of Proceedings of the International Ergonomics Conference has open access to all of its published content thus it is legally available for use on the Conference website. The open access operates under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC-ND) license; For non-commercial purposes, lets others distribute and copy the article, and to include in a collective work (such as an anthology), as long as they credit the author(s) and provided they do not alter or modify the article.
1. Duties and responsibilities of the authors:
1.1. Reporting standards – authors reporting results of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
1.2. Originality and Plagiarism – the submitted manuscript is the author’s original work and has not been published under this or similar title ever before, nor submitted to any other editorial board or to any International Referee Committee, electronic, printed or other media nor any third parties.
1.3. Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication – author/s should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one Conference proceeding concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another proceeding a previously published paper.
1.4. Authorship of manuscript – authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be named in an Acknowledgement section. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list of the manuscript, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.
1.5. Acknowledgement of sources – data and quotations from other works published in journals and other technical and scientific publications are clearly and distinctly indicated and marked.
1.6. Disclosure and conflicts of interest – there is no liability towards third parties that results from the publication of the presented data. The authors should disclose in their acknowledgements any financial or other substantive conflict of interest in their manuscript that might be construed to influence its results or interpretation.
1.7. Research involving humans or animals – appropriate approval, licensing or registration should be obtained before the research begins. If requested by editors, authors should supply evidence that reported research received the appropriate approval and was carried out ethically (e.g. copies of approvals, licences, participant consent forms). The corresponding author who is also the presenter at the Conference confirms with his/her signature in the Co-author statement form that consent forms have been collected and signed by participants that have been involved in the research both voluntarily and anonymously.
1.8. Peer review process – authors with submitted manuscript have the obligation to participate in the peer-review process.
2. Duties and responsibilities of the reviewers:
2.1. Contribution to editorial decisions – reviewers assist the editor/s in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communication with the author, may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.
2.2. Timeliness – a reviewer should accept an invitation to peer review if qualified to judge a particular manuscript, and agrees to return a review within proposed or mutually agreed time-frame.
2.3. Confidentiality – confidentiality of the peer review process should be respected and reviewers should refrain from using information obtained during the peer review process for their own or another’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others. Others should not be included in the review of a manuscript unless permission is obtained from the editor/s, thus their names should be associated with the manuscript as to receive due recognition for their efforts.
2.4. Objectivity and acknowledgement – reviews should be conducted objectively and reviewers should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments, thus no personal criticism of the author is acceptable. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.
2.5. Competing or conflicting interests – competing interests may be personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political or religious in nature. A reviewer should not consider evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the submission.
3. Duties and responsibilities of the editors:
3.1. Fair play – editor/s evaluate submitted manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
3.2. Peer review process – all manuscripts are subjected to peer-review process. In the first stage the Editor-in-chief verifies the relevance of the manuscripts for the International Ergonomics Conference Book of Proceedings and assigns associate editors for initial evaluation and reviewer suggestions. Depending on the research topic the manuscript is sent to three independent reviewers (experts) in the field of the research. Reviewers are asked to answer questions concerning manuscript’s content and to classify the manuscript as publishable immediately, publishable with minor improvements, publishable with major improvements, or not publishable (rejected). Reviewer’s evaluations also include additional comments and remarks to the author/s. In the next stage authors are asked to respond to questions/comments given by the reviewers and send the revised manuscript in a due time. The revised manuscript and authors feedbacks are checked again by the reviewers and a final decision of approval or rejection is send to the Editor-in-chief. In the final stage the Editor-in-chief informs the authors on the manuscript decision and publication.
3.3. Reviewer selection – the editors ensure that appropriate reviewers are selected for submissions (i.e. individuals who are able to judge the work and are free from disqualifying competing interests).
3.4. Confidentiality – editor/s and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
3.5. Disclosure and conflicts of interest – unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the explicit written consent of the author/s.
4. Duties and responsibilities of the Publisher/Croatian Ergonomics Society:
4.1. The Croatian Ergonomics Society will make sure that good practise is conducted based on the above listed responsibilities and duties.
4.2. The Croatian Ergonomics Society will not interfere with the editors decisions in the manuscript selections but will provide support to the editors to follow the publication procedures based on the principles of COPE.
Dealing with unethical behaviour
The Editor-in-chief, the editors and reviewers will take reasonable steps to identify and prevent publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred. Both editors and reviewers will inform the Editor-in-chief in case of misconduct identification and will not knowingly allow for it to take place. The Editor-in-chief will not simply reject the manuscripts with possible misconduct but will investigate the case.
In case of serious misconduct and only with convincing evidence the Editor-in-chief will pass the information to the authors’ employers and the authors. If no convincing evidence is presented with the misconduct accusations the Editor-in-chief will confidentially seek experts’ advice. The authors will be given the opportunity to respond to accusations of serious misconduct or to publish corrections, clarifications, apologies or to retract the manuscript.
In case of less serious misconduct the Editor-in-chief will not necessary involve the authors’ employers but will give the authors the opportunity to respond to any charge of minor misconduct.
