Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Editorial Board of the multidisciplinary collected scientific transactions “Nanosistemi, Nanomateriali, Nanotehnologii” (transliterated title according to the ISSN / E-ISSN: 1816-5230 / 2617-3794) or “Nanosystems, Nanomaterials, Nanotechnologies” (English title) follows ethics norms accepted by international scientific community and makes every endeavour to prevent any infringements of the norms. The Editorial Board follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics.

1. Editorial Board and Editor Duties

1. The double blind peer-review process by reviewers-experts in the field of the submitted manuscript is applied for all received articles. Editor-in-Chief and Deputy Editor-in-Chief ensure an external peer review process: they identify and invite independent experts with relevant scientific expertise from around the world to review the manuscript, ensuring that their knowledge and skills will ensure a thorough review.
2. The factors, which are taken into account in reviewing process, are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and quality of language. Reviewing the article, experts pay attention to the compliance with the journal scope, reasonableness, significance, originality, readability, and the language quality.
3. Based on the results of the review, the article may be accepted for publication without revision, accepted with revision, or rejected.
4. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed. If an article is rejected, it will not be reviewed once more.
5. If the manuscript is clearly unsuitable for publication, it may be rejected without review.
6. The editors make a decision on publication, guided by the policy of the periodical, taking into account the current legislation in the field of copyright.
7. The manuscripts are routinely scanned for plagiarism. Information is not allowed to be published if there are sufficient grounds to believe that it is plagiarized. Free online plagiarism checker tools (https://www.plagramme.com, https://smallseotools.com/plagiarism-checker) are used.
8. In the presence of any conflicts of interest (financial, academic, personal), all participants in the review process must notify the editorial board. All disputed issues are considered at a meeting of the Editorial Board.
9. Articles accepted for publication are publicly available on the website of the periodical reserving the copyrights with authors.
10. Responsibility for the editorial oversight on manuscripts during and after the peer review process, as well as for the final decision on manuscripts, rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

2. Reviewers’ Duties

1. Reviewers evaluate articles based on their content, regardless of the authors' nationality, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, or political beliefs.
2. Editorial staff must not disclose any information about received articles to persons who are not reviewers, authors, editorial and publishing staff.
3. Reviewing should be carried out objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewers are obliged to justify their point of view clearly and objectively.
4. Peer review helps the Publisher make decisions and amend the article through assistance with reviewers and authors.
5. Materials of the manuscript received for review are confidential documents and reviewed anonymously.
6. The reviewer is also obliged to draw the editor's attention to the significant or partial similarity of the presented article with any other work with which the reviewer is directly familiar.

3. Authors’ Duties

1. Authors must present an accurate report of the work they carried out and results they obtained along with an objective discussion of the significance. Obviously false or falsified statements are not acceptable.
2. An article should contain enough information to verify and repeat experiments or calculations by other researchers. Fraudulent or knowingly false or inaccurate statements amount to unethical behavior are unacceptable.
3. Authors may submit the original regular and review papers. Any textual or graphic information adopted from the other (already published) works (including owns), requires the referencing (citing) to relevant publications (in the list of references) and/or written permission of their author.
4. Submitting an article to more than one periodical is considered unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
5. Authorship should be limited to those researchers who made a significant contribution to the motivation of the study, conception, idea, design, performance, or interpretation of the obtained results.
6. Authors can acknowledge organizations/institutions and colleagues for support and discussions of the studies, as well as indicate sources of financial support (grants, projects, etc.) for the carried out research.

4. Retractions and Post-Publication Corrections

   If a correction after an article has been published is needed, it will be made after careful consideration by the journal’s editorial team to make sure any necessary changes comply with the journal policies and guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics. Aside from cases where a minor error is concerned, any necessary changes will be accompanied by a post-publication notice, which will be permanently linked to the original article. A statement will also be issued explaining the reasons for the major change to the article. In rare cases, retractions (removal) of published article may be necessary when the scientific information in it is materially compromised. All co-authors must sign a retraction to specify the error and briefly explain how the conclusion was affected, and submit it for publication. If misconduct is found in the published article, the Editorial Board will issue a statement of concern during the investigation. If necessary, the published article will be retracted (removed) with a statement of explanation.