The journal is guided by the regulations of an ethical conduct in science supported by the International Committee on publication ethics (COPE) and relies on the experience of authoritative international journals and publishing houses.
The journal serves as a platform for scientific communications of students, graduate students and representatives of the academic community. All parties involved in the publication process bear responsibility for observance of modern requirements for scientific work.
Authorship of work
The author is the person who has developed and performed a research and has formulated the results in the submitted manuscript. Co-authors are the persons who were participating in the research process and producing the statement of results. Those who took part in some essential aspects of the research project should be included in the list of participants of the project. The names of the co-authors and participants of the project should be placed on the list. All co-authors have to be acquainted with the final version of the paper and give their consent to its publication.
Information disclosure and conflicts of interests
The authors are obliged to disclose in the papers the information that can become a basis for a conflict of interests, influence on the results of the work done and its findings. All sources of financial support of the project should be disclosed.
Originality and plagiarism
Authors should submit an original, credible and objective study. Plagiarism in any form is unethical and unacceptable.
When using works of other authors one must give bibliographic references to the papers used and follow the rules of citing. Authors should cite publications that mattered for the completion of the research presented.
The Repeated and competing publications
The submission of the same paper in more than one journal simultaneously is viewed as unethical behavior. The author should not offer for publication an earlier published paper.
The publication of a certain type of articles, for example, translations, can be acted out in case if the authors and editors concerned have expressed their consent to the secondary publication containing the same information as in the initially performed work.
Essential mistakes in the works submitted for publication
If the editors have the information that the work contains essential mistakes, the author may refuse publishing the work or correct the mistakes as soon as possible.
The decision to publish
The final decision on the publication of a scholar paper is made by the editor-in-chief of the Journal. The principle of scientific objectivity and originality is the cornerstone of the conclusion about the publication. The editorial Board bears the full responsibility for the decision to publish the paper. In taking the decision on the publication the editorial Board relies on the opinions of the reviewers and introduces the experts’ opinions.
The editor refuses to review the paper personally in case of some conflict of interest. In this case, the final decision is delegated to the members of the editorial Board.
The editor and the editorial Board disclose the information on the accepted paper before its publishing to authors, reviewers, academic advisers only. Information and the ideas obtained in the course of reviewing or editing the paper remain confidential and are not used.
Resolution of conflicts
The editor takes the reasoned answer-back measures in case of ethical claims to the papers or publications.
Procedures for external peer review
A single-blind peer review method is mandatory for processing of scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial stuff of the Journal. This implies that the reviewer is aware of the authorship of the mauscript, but the author not maintains any contact with the reviewer.
Members of the editorial board and leading expets in corresponding areas of sciences perform peer reviews. Editor-in-chief choose editor for peer review. We aim to limit the review process to 2 weeks, though in some cases the schedule may be adjusted at the reviewer’s request.
Reviewer has an option to abnegate the assessment should any conflict of interests arise that may affect perception or interpretation of the manuscript. Upon the scrutiny, the reviewer is expected to present the editorial board with one of the following recommendations:
– the article is recommended for publication;
– the article is recommended for publication subject to comments;
– the article is not recommended for publication.
If the reviewer has recommended any refinements, the editorial staff would suggest the author either to implement the corrections, or to dispute them reasonably.
If author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editor-in-chief resolves the conflict by his own authority.
The editorial board reaches final decision to reject a manuscript on the hearing according to reviewers’ recommendations, and duly notifies the authors of their decision via e-mail. The board does not accept previously rejected manuscripts for re-evaluation.
Upon the decision to accept the manuscript for publishing, the editorial staff notifies the authors of the scheduled date of publication.
Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited for 5 years.
Reviewing is an effective tool for establishing scientific communication. The reviewer, as one of the parties involved in the publication process, follows the rules of publication ethics. The reviewer reasons their opinion and represents an objective assessment of the article.
Any paper submitted for reviewing shall be treated as a confidential document and can not be shown to other parties without prior agreement with the editor-in-chief.