Publication Ethics

Declaration of Publication Ethics

1. General provisions

1.1. This Declaration of Publication Ethics (hereinafter referred to as the Declaration) was developed to ensure that 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 Practice in Research and Development and the Declaration on the Ethical Principles of Scientific Publications of the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers.

1.3. Researchers, authors, editors, reviewers and publishers have ethical obligations with respect to the publication and dissemination of the results of scientific research in accordance with this Declaration.

2. Editorial responsibility

2.1. The 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 media; eliminates the possibility of business interests prevailing over scientific and ethical ones;

2.1.4. Expresses readiness to publish corrections, refutations and clarifications, if necessary.

2.2. The editorial board is guided by the principles of science, objectivity, professionalism, impartiality.

2.3. The editors inform readers about the financial support of published articles if such support is available.

2.4. When deciding whether to accept the article for publication or reject it, the Editorial Board proceeds from its significance, originality, relevance for the development of a particular branch of knowledge, as well as compliance with the profile of the journal.

2.5. The Editorial Board presents in detail the review process and describes the procedure for the author's action in case of disagreement with the decision of the Editorial Board in the open press.

2.6. The editors publish and regularly update the guide for authors.

2.7. The editorial board ensures that the review is carried out honestly and with an open mind and informs the reviewers of 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. The editors regularly acquaint their members with up-to-date manuals and documents within their competence.

2.9. In making decisions, the editorial board retains independence from 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. The editorial board guarantees the inviolability of personal data transferred by the authors.

2.12. In the event of a violation of the publication ethics, the editorial board retracts the article.

2.13. The editors comply with the requirements of copyright law.

2.14. The editorial office provides archiving of articles in libraries and repositories of scientific information.

2.15. The editorial board guarantees access to publications and information openness of the journal, including the placement of information on paid services in the presence of such services.

3. Responsibility of authors

3.1. The author's recognition of the article as 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 in a qualitative and thorough manner.

3.3. The authors use recognized scientific methods to analyze and present data.

3.4. The authors are collectively responsible for the content of the publication: calculations, data submissions, documentation and evidence generated by them.

3.5. The authors present the results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or unscrupulous manipulation of data.

3.6. The authors shall notify the Editors in the event of an error in any publication submitted by them, accepted for publication or already published work.

3.7. Authors cooperate with the Editorial Office if it is necessary to edit or reduce the work

3.8. The authors comply with the requirements for the originality of the article proposed for publication: new results should be presented in the context of previous research by authors and other scientists.

3.9. The authors comply with the requirements of the law regarding copyright. In all cases, a reference to the original source must be specified. Quotes and references to other works must be accurate and neatly framed.

3.10. The authors indicate the sources of funding for the research outlined in the published article, if such sources are available.

3.11. The authors do not submit the article simultaneously to several publications (they do not practice "fan mailing").

3.12. The authors disclose a conflict of interest in the presence of such a conflict.

3.13. Authors interact with the Editors to correct their articles as soon as possible if errors or inaccuracies are found 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 subject of peer review is the result of the study, not the author.

4.3. Reviewers do not allow personal criticism of the author, as well as arguments in expert opinions with reference to the 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 peer review is to express the reviewer's own opinion on the validity, novelty and significance of the results obtained. It is prohibited to compel an expert to disciplinary, administrative or criminal liability for the judgment expressed by him.

5. Unethical behavior in the field of scientific publications

The editors share the position of the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (HENR) 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-censorship.

5.2. Offer of agency services. Provision of such services to authors as "turnkey publication," correspondence with the editors on behalf of the author, revision by the agent of articles on the recommendations of the reviewer, preparation of paid reviews.

5.3. Selling co-authorship, gift co-authorship, changing the composition of authors.

5.4. Publication of materials of correspondence "scientific" conferences.

5.5. Transfer of article texts to other journals without agreement with authors.

5.6. Transfer of authors' materials to third parties.

5.7. Citation manipulation.

5.8. Plagiarism, falsifications and fabrications.

Ленинградский государственный университет им. А.С. Пушкина