This Statement regulates the rules of conduct to prevent and resolve conflicts in the field of ethics of publication, in particular, the following issues:
- incorrect attribution
- compulsory quoting
- falsification of data
- disclosure of confidential data
- conflict of interest
All submitted manuscripts should meet the following criteria:
- The manuscript should contain only the work of authors, plagiarism is not allowed.
- At the time of sending the article should not be published or be under consideration by another publication.
- In the article should be listed as the authors of all those and only those scientists who have made a significant intellectual contribution to getting results. It is assumed that at the time the article all the authors agree with the publication of a particular edition, and do not object to the order specified in the article authors.
- The article should contain a list of citing only the peer-reviewed sources that were actually used in the study.
- The data, based on which a group of authors have conducted research must be obtained from authoritative official sources. Readers should be able to obtain and verify the initial data.
For reviewers and editors:
Reviewers and editors in their work should strictly follow the principles listed below:
- Each manuscript is treated as a confidential document. It is not allowed any distribution and publication of the submissions received by the reviewer, including for the purposes of open peer review as well as for personal use.
- The object of the review is the result of research, not the author. Expert opinion should be impartial. Not allowed personal criticism of the author, and the argument for expert opinions with reference to gender, nationality, religion and other personal characteristics of the author.
- The reviewer can only perform a voluntary assessment of the manuscripts that meet its scientific and professional interests. Not allowed forcing an expert to reviewing whether the relevant articles of the sphere of its interests or not.
- In case of failure of the examination at the appropriate level, or within a reasonable time for any reason, the reviewer must deliver notify the editor in chief as soon as the decision will be made by the expert.
- The purpose of the review is to express an opinion expert on authenticity, originality and relevance of the results. The expert shall not be forced to disciplinary, administrative or criminal penalties for expressing their opinion.
Unacceptable violations and responsibility
Prior to the publication:
If a violation of the ethics of publication author identified during the examination of article, it can serve as a sufficient basis for refusing to publish such an article until the full correction of the violations.
Violation of the rules of publication ethics reviewer or editor can serve as a basis for termination of the cooperation of the journal. Identified and reasonable evidence of such a breach are required to be published on the journal’s website.
After the publication:
Violations identified after publication of articles are subject to a detailed examination of the parties concerned in accordance with the practices recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics. Minor violations can be corrected publication of official pronouncements. Significant violations involve the removal of the article from the publication of a notice about it on the pages of the journal and on the site. The significance of the violations determined by the party whose interests have been infringed as a result of such violation.
The fact that violations of Publication Ethics can be established only with the participation of all parties to the conflict which has arisen as a result of such violation. Prior to the establishment of any such fact must be described as a case of suspected infringement.
All identified cases are considered by the scientific council houses “Creative Economy” (Publishing House “Biblio-Globus”). Address for notifications – email@example.com.
The establishment of the violations of the norms of publication ethics and a further resolution of the situation comes within the framework of the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
If you think that any item shall not be approved in this Regulation or in the Regulations missing any of the important points, we welcome your comments and suggestions sent to firstname.lastname@example.org.
We also invite you to take part in discussions on publication ethics in our group FB