Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The LOGI is the electronic peer-reviewed international Scientific Journal on Transport and Logistics published by the force of several faculties of universities in the Czech Republic, Slovak Republic, Poland, Germany, Austria, Russia and Hungary. It is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics. In order to provide our readers with a journal of highest quality we state the following principles of Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.

All papers not in accordance with these principles will be removed from the publication if malpractice is discovered at any time even after the publication. All papers of the LOGI Journal are checked within the independent peer-review process. Also the plagiarism, research fabrication and falsification (manipulation of existing research data, tables, or images) are checked. The LOGI Journal reserves the right to use plagiarism detecting software to screen submitted papers at all times.

Ethical Guidelines for the LOGI Journal Publication

The publication of the papers in the peer-reviewed journal LOGI Journal is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed papers support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore necessary to agree upon these principles of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing:

  • the publisher,
  • the author,
  • the journal editor,
  • the peer reviewer.

    Duties of the Publishers


Institute of Technology and Business in České Budějovice as the main publisher of the journal LOGI takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities.


We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Institute of Technology and Business in České Budějovice and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.


Reporting Principles

Authors of the papers 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 paper. Each paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review and professional publications should also be accurate and objective, and editorial opinion works should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data regarding their paper for an editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

Authors should not in general publish papers describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. Publication of some kinds of papers in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing papers or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited only to those who have made a significant contribution to conceiving, designing, executing and/or interpreting the submitted study. All those who have significantly contributed to the study should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should also ensure that all the authors and co-authors have seen and approved the final submitted version of the paper and their inclusion as co-authors. If there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

Disclosure of Financial Support and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their papers any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their papers. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. 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.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. 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 promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.


Publication decisions

The editor of the peer-reviewed Journal LOGI is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted to the journal should be published. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Review of Papers

The editor ensures that each paper is initially assessed by the editor, who may make use of appropriate means, to examine the originality of the contents of the paper. After the paper passes this test, it is forwarded to two independent reviewers for the peer-review, and each of whom will make a recommendation to publish the paper in its present form or to modify or to reject it. The review period depends on several circumstances.

Fair play

The editor at any time assess the papers for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.


The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about the submitted paper to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. He must ensure that information regarding papers is kept confidential.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

The editor can not use unpublished materials, disclosed in submitted papers for his/her own research, without prior written consent of the author(s). Privileged data (ideas) obtained through peer-review process must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves from considering papers 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.


Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer-review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.


If the reviewer believes it is not possible for him/her to review the research reported in the paper within the designated guidelines, or within stipulated time, he/she should notify the editor, so that the accurate and timely review can be ensured.


The paper reviewers, the editor and the editorial staff must not disclose any data regarding submitted papers. All submitted papers are to be treated as privileged information (confidential documents).

Standards of Objectivity

The review of submitted papers will be conducted objectively. The reviewers shall express their views clearly, with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

Acknowledgement of Sources

The reviewers of papers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. The reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. The reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the particular paper under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

All the reviewers should not consider papers 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.