Publication Ethics Declaration
1. General Provisions
1.1. This Declaration of Publication Ethics (hereinafter referred to as the Declaration) was developed to ensure that the participants in the publication process (authors, reviewers, members of editorial boards and editorial boards (hereinafter referred to as the Editorial Board), publishers) comply with ethical principles and prevent abuse.
1.2. The Declaration was developed in accordance with the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Singapore Report on Good Research Practices and the Declaration of Ethical Principles for Scientific Publishing Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers.
1.3. Researchers, authors, editors, reviewers and publishers have an ethical obligation to publish and disseminate the results of scientific research in accordance with this Declaration.
2. Editorial responsibility
2.1. Editors are responsible for the published materials, such as:
2.1.1. seeks to meet the needs of readers and authors;
2.1.2. ensures quality control of published materials;
2.1.3. makes efforts to develop the journal as a scientific mass media; excludes the possibility of prevailing business interests over scientific and ethical ones;
2.1.4. expresses its readiness to publish corrections, refutations and clarifications, if necessary.
2.2. Editorial board is guided by the principles of scientific character, objectivity, professionalism, and impartiality.
2.3. Editors inform readers about the financial support of published articles, if such support is available.
2.4. When making a decision to accept an article for publication or reject it, Editorial Board proceeds from its significance, originality, relevance for the development of a particular field of knowledge, as well as compliance with the profile of the journal.
2.5. Editorial Board presents the review process in detail and describes the procedure for the author to act in case of disagreement with the decision of the Editorial Board in the open press.
2.6. Editors publish and regularly update the guide for authors.
2.7. Editors guarantee that the review is carried out honestly and impartially and brings to the attention of the reviewers the requirement to maintain the confidentiality of the review process, as well as the need to declare a conflict of interest in the presence of such a conflict.
2.8. Editorial staff regularly acquaints its members with relevant guidelines and documents within its competence.
2.9. In making decisions, the editors remain independent of the founding organization of the journal based on the quality of the submitted articles and their compliance with the profile of the journal.
2.10. Editorial decisions are made within a limited time frame and are set out in a clear and constructive form on the journal's website in the instructions for authors.
2.11. Editors guarantee the inviolability of personal data transmitted by the authors.
2.12. In case of revealing the fact of violation of publication ethics, the editorial board retracts the article.
2.13. Editors comply with the requirements of copyright law.
2.14. Editors provide archiving of articles in libraries and repositories of scientific information.
2.15. Editorial board guarantees access to publications and information openness of the journal, including the placement of information about paid services if such services are available.
3. Responsibility of authors
3.1. The recognition by the author of the article of a person who was largely involved in its writing, concept development, scientific design, material collection, analysis and interpretation is presumed.
3.2. The article published by the authors should reflect the results of a study conducted in accordance with ethical and legal standards, qualitatively and carefully.
3.3. Authors use recognized scientific methods for analyzing and presenting data.
3.4. Authors bear collective responsibility for the content of the publication: calculations, presentation of data, documentation and evidence generated by them.
3.5. Authors present the results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or dishonest manipulation of data.
3.6. Authors notify Editorial Office in case of detection of an error in any submitted by them for publication, accepted for publication or already published work.
3.7. Authors cooperate with Editorial Board if necessary to edit or reduce the work
3.8. Authors comply with the requirements for the originality of the article proposed for publication: new results must be presented in the context of previous studies by the authors and other scientists.
3.9. Authors comply with copyright laws. In all cases, a link to the original source must be indicated. Quotations and references to other works should be accurate and neatly formatted.
3.10. Authors indicate the sources of funding for the research presented in the published article, if such sources are available.
3.11. Authors do not send the article to several publications at the same time (they do not practice "fan mailing").
3.12. Authors disclose a conflict of interest in the presence of such a conflict.
3.13. Authors interact with Editorial Board to correct their articles as soon as possible in case of detection of errors or inaccuracies in them after publication.
4. Responsibility of reviewers
4.1. Reviewers treat each manuscript as a confidential document.
4.2. Reviewers proceed from the principle that the object of review is the result of the study, and not the author.
4.3. Reviewers do not allow personal criticism of the author, as well as argumentation in expert opinions with reference to gender, nationality, religion and other personal qualities of the author.
4.4. Reviewers perform voluntary evaluation of manuscripts in accordance with their scientific and professional interests.
4.5. The purpose of the review is to express the reviewer's own opinion on the reliability, novelty and significance of the results obtained. It is prohibited to force an expert to disciplinary, administrative or criminal liability for his judgment.
5. Unethical behavior in the field of scientific publications
The editors share the position of the Association of Science Editors and Publishers (ANRI) and recognizes the following as unethical behavior in the field of scientific publications:
5.1. The requirement for authors to independently provide reviews of their own articles, as well as contractual and pseudo-reviewing.
5.2. Proposal of agency services. Provision of such services to authors as "turnkey publication", correspondence with the editors on behalf of the author, revision of articles by the agent on the recommendations of the reviewer, preparation of paid reviews.
5.3. Sale of co-authorship, gift co-authorship, change in the composition of authors.
5.4. Publication of materials of correspondence "scientific" conferences.
5.5. Transfer of texts of articles to other journals without the consent of the authors.
5.6. Transfer of materials of authors to third parties.
5.7. Citation manipulation.
5.8. Plagiarism, falsification and fabrication