Skip to main content

InfoTech conference

2024 International Conference on Information Technologies

Publication Ethics

Ethical guidelines for journal publication

These guidelines are based on the existing Elsevier policy according to Publishing Ethics Resource Kit for publishing ethics and malpractice statement, the Cambridge journals ethical standards, COPE Code of Conduct, COPE Guidelines (COPE – Committee on Publication Ethics,

The publication of an article in the Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Technologies (InfoTech – contributes to growth of knowledge. Authors are encouraged to submit high quality, original works (theoretical and application-based studies) that have not been published or accepted for publishing by other journals and conference materials. We encourage the best standards of publication ethics and take all possible measures against publication malpractices. It is important to agree upon standards of proper ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: authors, editors, peer reviewers and the publisher. The conference organizer & publisher takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities.

Responsibilities of authors


Submitted manuscripts should not have been previously published or be currently under consideration for publication. Each article must present original research, accurate theoretical theses and correct experimental results, and all these data should be represented accurately in the paper. The authors’ work presented in the submitted article should permit to make an objective discussion of its significance.

Each article should contain a significant amount of new material that has not been published elsewhere and sufficient details and references to permit others to replicate presented research, proposed approach, obtained results and conclusions. The authors are responsible to guarantee that all data in the article are real and authentic. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Originality and plagiarism

Main responsibility of the authors is to present their own original work in the submitted article and to ensure accuracy of the proposed research and results. If the authors have used the work and/or words of other publications this should be appropriately cited or quoted. In other hand plagiarism or self-plagiarism are unethical publishing behaviour and are unacceptable for participation in the InfoTech sessions and publications in InfoTech Proceedings. In this reason the authors have a responsibility for the abidance by the copyright and plagiarism laws. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. All these forms of plagiarism are unacceptable and the article will be rejected at the reviewing process. Authors of article rejected due to plagiarism/self-plagiarism should be grateful to the Program Committee because all publications in the InfoTech Proceedings are included in 3 scientific databases of EBSCOHost, indexed and abstracted by different sites, and they are published in the conference web site ( All papers published in each Conference Proceedings are accessed via the global network and various visitors could detect plagiarism when they exist and this will have worse consequences based on academic ethics.

Multiple publication

The practice for presenting the essence of a research in more than one article in different conferences & journals is unethical publishing behaviour and this is unacceptable. An obligation of the authors is do not submit for consideration and possible participation in another forum a paper that have been already published or paper in general proposed for other submission.

Participation in reviewing process

Each proposed article will be pre-reviewed by the Chairman of the InfoTech Program Committee for their formal structure, formatting in accordance with the journal rules, bearing in mind correspondence to the journal sections and topics, etc. When a paper is prepared in a proper way the article will be sent for blind peer reviewing by two independent reviewers – members of the InfoTech International Program Committee The peer reviewing of the paper is obligatory and authors must accept this rule a priory.

Paper revision

The reviewer’s reports will be sent to the authors (or to the corresponding author) after finalising the review procedure. An obligation of the authors is to revise the paper in accordance with the reviewer’s remarks and return final improved version of the previously submitted article. Each accepted paper will be included in the Conference Program ( if the final version is relevant to the reviewer’s remarks. The corresponding author is responsible to guarantee that the article has been approved by all the other authors. All presented during the InfoTech sessions articles will be published in the current Conference Proceedings – the Conference Process is presented in the InfoTech web site ( The best papers selected by the Program Committee could be directed for possible publishing in the scientific journal International Journal on IT and Security (ISSN 1313-8251, that is indexed by Web of Science (WoS).


Upon acceptance of article to take part in the InfoTech and before its publishing, the author(s) will be asked to transfer copyright of the article to the publisher by filling in and signing “Copyright Transfer Agreement”. This transfer is required because of dissemination the issues of the journal in printed and electronic version to libraries and scientific databases.

Authorship of the paper

Each paper could reveal the authors’ personal scientific point of view and conclusions but InfoTech has no influence on their correctness. 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. Any other persons who have been participated in a project and/or a research as a partners should be listed as contributors or be acknowledged. A responsibility of the corresponding author is to ensure that all persons with relation to the submitted article are included in the paper as co-authors, contributors or are acknowledged.

References, acknowledgement and conflicts of interest

Authors have a responsibility to include all other publications used during the paper preparation in a list of references and to make citation in the main text. The list of references should contain all publication discussed in the sections “Introduction”, “Related work”, and that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. The acknowledgment of the work of others who have contributed to determine the main subject discussed in the reported paper and/or to make the research must always be pointed out by a suitable manner in the submitted manuscript. On the other hand the authors of submitted manuscript should disclose any financial or other support in order to preclude conflict of interest. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

Human or animal subjects

The sections of the InfoTech Conference ( are Information Technologies, Information Security, Networking and Communication Technologies, Intelligent Systems and Applications, Technologies for System Design and Investigation, and Technological Aspects of e-Governance and Privacy but there exists a possibility some authors to submit articles which deals with human or animal subjects. In this case the authors should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant international, national, local and institutional laws and requirements and confirm that approval has been sought and obtained. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed the obtaining consent for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

Fundamental errors in submitted or published articles

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in submitted article or in his/her own published paper, it is the author's obligation to notify promptly the editor or publisher and to cooperate with the editor/publisher to retract or correct the paper, to publish an erratum, addendum, and corrigendum note. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to retract promptly to correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Responsibilities of publisher

Publication decisions

InfoTech organiser and publisher is responsible for deciding which of the submitted manuscripts should be published in the Conference Proceedings. This decision should be made based on importance of the discussed theme and research, readers’ interest, conclusions after reviewing procedure, and presentation during the conference sessions. In addition, the decision for publishing or not of any article should be based on legal requirements, copyright infringement, plagiarism and other unethical behaviour.

Fair play

The publisher should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.


The publisher and the editors must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author and reviewers.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a publisher´s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. The publisher should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

The publisher should take responsible measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Responsibilities of reviewers

Reviewer selection and confidentiality

After receiving a manuscript the organizer selects suitable member(s) of the InfoTech International Program Committee for potential reviewer(s) and sends his/him article with a form for reviewer’s report. Any selected reviewer who is not able to make peer reviewing because of an insuperable obstacle should notify the organizer. Any manuscript received for review must be treated by e reviewer as confidential document. It must not be shown to or discussed with others.

Reviewing procedure

Each submitted manuscript will be reviewed by two independent reviewers (experts in the field) and the corresponding author will be informed for the results. Each reviewer should specify during the reviewing how much the paper is related to the field of InfoTech. A third reviewer could be used if the first two reviews have quite different statements concerning acceptance. During the review process papers will be checked for plagiarism (or self-plagiarism) by reviewers and in case of evidence that large portions of a paper are previously published (no matter if it is by the same or different authors), the paper will be rejected. The result of reviewing will be in one of the following form: Accept in this form; Accept with minor revision; Accept with major revision; Reject. Once the initial review results are submitted to the authors, depending on the decision, the authors will be informed for the next steps. The final decision for publishing will be announced by sending Registration Form for participation in current InfoTech Conference.

Acceptance criteria

The conference criteria for acceptance/rejection of a submitted manuscript are included in the Reviewer’s Report Form accesed by visiting InfoTech web site (see and includes: within the scope of the Conference; is the title satisfatory with respect to the content?; originality; sceintific value; clarity and suitability; paper style; general structure of the paper; figures presentation. Each of these positions are evaluated by using 10-point scale and general numerical value is calculated. If this assessment is less than 50% of the maximal value, the reviewer’s conclusion should be rejection.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of sources

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.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider 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 connected to the papers.