Ethics of the Scientific Publication
Ethical Principles of the Scientific Publications
appropriation of author’s materials in the interests of others.
This Governance statement corresponds to the policy of the Journal and is one of the main components of the Journal review and publication.
1. Ethical Responsibilities of the Authors
Authors should be aware that they bear full personal responsibility for the provided text of the publication that encompasses the following:
1.1. When the authors provide their article for publication they gaurantee the newness and originality of the materials by giving consent to the publication of the article and personal data.
1.2. Authors are required to provide reliable results of the research. Knowingly untruthful and falsified statements are equal to unethical behavior and are inadmissable.
1.3. In case of data borrowing the article should contain a reference to the published (printed or electronic) sources of data borrowing. Any information, data, pictures, tables and photos belonging to other authors or text parts copied from the other sources should be appropriately cited and referenced. A reference to the unpublished information is possible only in exceptional cases and with the written consent given by the author of the information. Excessive appropriations and plagiarism in any form, including unqualified quotation, rephrasing or assignment of the rights of somebody’s research results are considered as unethical and
inappropriate actions. All the articles, which are the compilation of the materials previously published by the other authors, without creative revision and personal author’s rethinking of these materials, are unacceptable and cannot be published in the Journal.
1.4. Authors of the Journal must ensure that they have done the original research that provides new findings in Science. In addition, they ought to ensure that the article has not been published before elsewhere in Ukraine or abroad. Non-compliance with these principles is considered as a rude violation of the publication ethics and gives substantiation for reviewing refusal. The content of an article must be original, in other words it must be published in the present form in periodical printing for the first time. If the elements of an article were published in another article, the authors must make a reference to early work and define essential differences of new work with the previous one. Literal copying of personal works and its rephrasing are inappropriate; they can be used only for basis of new conclusions.
1.5. The authors should recognize the contribution of all persons who somehow influenced the course of the study or determined the nature of the presented scientific work. All persons who made an essential intellectual contribution to the concept, structure and carrying out or interpretation of the given work results are recognised among the co-authors of the article. The relevant attribution should be given to other people who took part in some aspects of the work. The author should also guarantee that all the co-authors looked through the final version of the article, approved it and agreed to publication. In case of providing any intellectual and financial support to authors it is desirable to clearly discuss such facts in the articles.
1.6. The authors are responsible for the literary design of the publication. The authors should immediately inform the Editorial Board of the Journal in case of detection of significant mistakes or uncertainties in the article and make a collective decision on its correction or recognition of the error as soon as possible.
1.7. The authors must comply with the agreed statement on Ethics and Publication Malpractice of the Journal, rules and procedures of peer review and publication processes. The authors should correspond with the Executive Secretary of the Editorial Board after submitting the article and until peer review and publishing preparation are concluded.
2. Ethical principles in the reviewers activity
The reviewer carries out a scientific impartial expertise of the original materials, following the next responsibilities:
2.1. The reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on content without regard to ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship, religious beliefs or political views of the authors. Expert assessment should help the author to improve quality of the article text.
2.2. The reviewer can’t be the author or co-author of the reviewing work, as well as research advisor of applicants of a degree.
2.3. Peer review of manuscripts should be done in a short time (no more than 3 months) to ensure the status of confidentiality of the materials that make up the subject of assessment.
2.4. A reviewer should be objective in his/her reviews and express his/her opinion clearly and reasonably. The reviewer enters his/her conclusion in a special questionnaire or submits it in a detailed form. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
2.5. Reviewers in their work are guided by the policy of the journal, avoiding libel, author’s copyright violation and plagiarism.
2.6. The reviewer should not use the information and ideas obtained during the peer-review process for the personal benefit, respecting the confidentiality of this information and ideas.
2.7. If the reviewer does not feel to be in a position to review or acknowledges that a prompt review will be impossible, the Executive Secretary should be notified.
3. Principles of professional ethics in activity of Editorial Board
The Editorial Board is guided by the traditional ethical principles of scientific periodicals for the dissemination of reliable and high-quality information. In their activities as editors and members of the Editorial Board of the journal are responsible for the publication of author's works, adhering to such main responsibilities:
3.1. The Editorial Board is responsible for the decision which articles will be published or refused. At the same time it is guided by the policy of the journal and follows legal restrictions, avoiding libel, author’s copyright violation and plagiarism.
3.2. The decision of the Editorial Board on the publication of the article should be based on the reliability of the presented data and scientific importance of
the considered paper.
3.3. The Editorial Board evaluates articles for their intellectual content without discrimination on race, gender sex, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship or political beliefs of the authors.
3.4. The Editor-in-chief, Executive Secretary, employees of Editorial Board, editorial-and-publishing group and editorial group of the journal can’t expose information about an article to nobody, except the authors, assigned potential reviewers and other editorial board members.
3.5. Unpublished materials may not be used or given to a third party without the written consent of the authors.
3.6. If there are enough reasons to believe that this information constitutes plagiarism, the Editorial Board does not allow such information to publication.
3.7. In case of publication the article is placed in public domain, retaining author’s copyright.
3.8. The Editor-in-chief together with the publisher shouldn’t ignore the claims concerning the considered manuscripts or published materials. In any conflict situation they should undertake all measures to restore violated rights.
3.9. The Editor-in-chief, Executive Secretary should support confidentiality of names and other information concerning the reviewers. Should a need to involve a new reviewer arise, the new reviewer can be informed of the names of previous reviewers.