The editors are guided by the following ethical principles:
– editorial objectivity and impartiality;
-observance of scientific ethics when reviewing articles, encouraging honest scientific discussion between authors and reviewers;
– non-disclosure of personal data of authors and reviewers as well as other information obtained during professional interaction;
– respect for authors’ opinion and the results of their research;
– correct attitude to the authors’ complaints in case of refusal to publish their articles;
– observance of the accepted by the editors order of registration of the provided for publication information and assistance to authors in its observance;
– timely and accurate informing the authors about the reviewer’s comments and requests as well as coordination with them of the terms of amendments to the article in accordance with the received review;
– rejection of the article that was identified as containing previously published materials of other authors without reference to the original sources; making an impartial judgment to the article and the exclusion of possible conflict of interest;
– acceptance for publication of the article after the authors make the necessary additions and changes;
– motivated explanation of the cause of refusal in case of rejection to publish the submitted materials;
– adoption of adequate response measures together with the reviewers in case of presentation the editors of ethical claims related to the procedures of manuscripts consideration or publication.
The main purpose of the scientific publication is to acquaint the scientific community with the results of the authors ‘ research. Each scientific article includes an analysis and summarizing the research results in the relevant field.
The authors of the submitted materials are responsible for the content of their works and have to comply with the following principles:
– compliance of materials for publication with ethical and legal standards;
– originality and scientific novelty of research;
– presentation of reliable results of the work, the absence of false statements, error-free data presentation;
– objective discussion of the significance of the research;
– inadmissibility of personal, critical or dismissive remarks and accusations against other researchers;
– submission as co-authors of all participants who have made a significant contribution to the research and writing the article as well as obtaining from all co-authors approval of the final version of the work and their consent to its publication;
– exception of plagiarism, recognition of the contribution of other persons, mandatory presence of bibliographic references to publications used in this article;
– informing about the fact that the article has not been published anywhere before, has not been sent and will not be sent for publication to other scientific publications without notifying the editors of the journal;
– the use (reproduction) of materials, tables, figures belonging to other authors only after receiving permission from them and the obligatory indication of these authors in the article;
– submission of information from confidential sources only with their permission;
– absence of self-plagiarism in the article;
-reproduction of own provisions is allowed in the form of their summary and only if it is necessary to substantiate or develop the provisions in the presented material;
– informing on detection of essential mistakes or inaccuracies in the publication and interaction with the editors in order to correct the revealed errors promptly or withdraw the publication;
– clear indication in the text of the manuscript of information about the sources of research funding and other forms of support that have influenced the results or conclusions presented in the work;
– disclosure of potential conflicts of interests that may appear in connection with the material presented in the article.
Reviewing a scientific article is a very time-consuming and responsible process. The purpose of the review is to assess the accuracy and reliability of the material presentation as well as to ensure that the author follows the standards adopted in a particular field or science as a whole.
When accepting a manuscript for reviewing, reviewers should adhere to the following principles:
– reviewing manuscripts concerning the field of their knowledge;
– timeliness of the review;
– confidentiality of the manuscript and its expert evaluation;
– objectivity and constructiveness when preparing the review;
– consistent and reasoned expression of the reviewer’s opinion (criticism of the author’s personality is unacceptable);
– identification of major published scientific works prepared on the subject of the author’s research and not included in the bibliography;
– lack of influence on the review content of the source of the manuscript, nationality, gender, religious or political beliefs of the authors;
– saving for the reviewer the right to remain unknown to the authors of the assessed work;
– informing the editors about the conflict of interest;
– inadmissibility of the use by reviewers of obtained during the review information for personal purposes or in the interests of other persons.