PUBLICATION ETHICS GUIDELINES
Editorial board of the scientific journal “Academy Review” adheres to the ethics guidelines adopted by the international community as reflected in the recommendations of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) , is governed by the provisions of Article 42 “Academic Virtue” Law of Ukraine “On Education” and recommendations of Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine provided in the letter “On the provision of academic virtue in higher educational institutions" , and also takes into account the valuable experience of authoritative international journals and publishing houses.
In order to avoid unfair practices in publishing activities (plagiarism, unreliable information, etc.), in order to ensure the high quality of scientific publications, public recognition of scientific results obtained by the author, each member of the editorial board, author, peer reviewer, publisher, and institutions participating in the publishing process are obliged to comply with ethical standards, norms and rules and take measures to prevent their violations. Compliance with the rules of ethics of scientific publications by all participants in this process contributes to ensuring the authors' rights to intellectual property, improving the quality of the publication and excluding the possibility of misuse of copyrighted materials in the interests of individuals.
1. Professional Ethics Guidelines for the Publisher
In the course of its activities publisher is responsible for the publication of copyrighted works, which entails the need to comply with the following fundamental principles and procedures:
1.1. To promote the fulfillment of ethical duties by the editorial staff, the editorial and publishing group, the editorial board, peer reviewers and authors in accordance with these requirements.
1.2. To support the editorial staff of the journal in reviewing claims on the ethical aspects of published materials and help to interact with other journals and / or publishers, if this facilitates the performance of the duties of editors.
1.3. To ensure the confidentiality of the publication received from the authors and any information before it is published.
1.4. To realize that the activity of the journal is not a commercial project and is not aimed at making profit.
1.5. To be always ready to publish corrections, clarifications, refutations and apologies when it is necessary.
1.6. To provide editorial staff with the possibility of excluding publications containing plagiarism and inaccurate data.
1.7. The publisher (editor) has the right to reject the manuscript or to require the author to finalize it if the manuscript preparation violates the Rules adopted in this journal and agreed with the Publishing House.
1.8. The article, if accepted for publication, is placed in the public domain; copyright reserved.
1.9. To place information on the financial support of the research, if the author provides such information in the article.
1.10. If there are any content, grammatical, stylistic or other errors, the editorial board shall take all measures to eliminate them.
1.11. To coordinate with the author editorial proofs introduced in the article.
1.12. Not to delay the release of the journal.
2. Ethical Guidelines for the Author of a Scientific Publication
Author (or a team of authors) when submitting materials to a scientific journal “Academy Review” realizes that he bears primary responsibility for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research, which implies observance of the following principles:
2.1. The authors of the article should provide reliable results of the research. Statements known to be forged or falsified are unacceptable.
2.2. The authors must ensure that the results of the research described in the provided manuscript are completely original. Borrowed fragments or statements shall contain a mandatory indication of the author and the original source. Excessive borrowings, as well as plagiarism in any form, including unformulated quotes, paraphrasing or assigning rights to the results of the research of other people are unethical and unacceptable. The existence of a borrowing without reference will be considered as plagiarism by the editorial board.
2.3. Authors are obligated to provide only genuine facts and information in the manuscript; give sufficient information to check and repeat experiments of other researchers; not to use information obtained in private, without open written permission; prevent fabrication and falsification of data.
2.4. Do not allow duplication of publications (in the cover letter, the author must indicate that the work is published for the first time). If individual elements of the manuscript were previously published, the author is obliged to refer to earlier work and indicate the differences of the new work from the previous one.
2.5. Authors are not to provide a journal with a manuscript that has been sent to another journal and is on approval, as well as an article already published in another journal.
2.6. It is necessary to recognize the contribution of all persons who in one way or another influenced the course of the research, in particular the article must contain references to the works that were relevant to the study.
2.7. Authors are to comply with ethical standards when criticizing or commenting on third-party research.
2.8. The co-authors of the article are obliged to indicate all persons who have made a significant contribution to the research. It is inadmissible to indicate among co-authors persons who did not participate in the study research.
2.9. Authors are to respect the work of the editorial board and reviewers and follow peer reviewer’s comments or reasonably dismiss them.
2.10. Authors are obliged to present and prepare the manuscript according to the rules adopted in the journal.
2.11. If the author finds significant errors or inaccuracies in the article at the stage of its consideration or after its publication, he must immediately notify the editorial board;
2.12. Authors must provide the editorial board or publisher with proof of the accuracy of the original article or correct significant errors if the editorial board or the publisher has learned about them from third parties.
3. Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers
Peer reviewer provides scientific expertise of copyrighted material therefore his actions are to be impartial
in nature and apply the following principles:
3.1. The manuscript received for review is considered to be a confidential document that cannot be passed on for review or discussion to third parties without authorization from the editorial office.
3.2. Peer reviewers are required to know that the submitted manuscripts are the intellectual property of the authors and present information that could not be divulged. Violation of confidentiality is possible only in case of a peer reviewer’s statement about unreliability or falsification of the materials stated in the article.
3.3. The peer reviewer is to pay attention of the editor-in-chief to the substantial or partial similarity of the reviewed manuscript to any other work, as well as the facts of absence of references to the provisions, conclusions or arguments previously published in other works of this or other authors.
3.4. The peer reviewer is obliged to note relevant published works that are not cited (in the article).
3.5. The peer reviewer is obliged to give an objective and reasoned assessment of the results of the research and clearly grounded recommendations. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
3.6. The comments of the peer reviewer are to be objective and fundamental, aimed at increasing the scientific level of the manuscript.
3.7. The peer reviewer is to make decisions guided by specific facts and produce testimony to his decision.
3.8. Peer reviewers are not allowed to make copies of manuscripts for their own needs.
3.9. Peer reviewers are not allowed to take advantage of knowledge about the content of the work before it is published.
3.10. The peer reviewer who does not possess, in his opinion, sufficient qualification for the evaluation of the manuscript, or cannot be objective, for example, in the case of a conflict of interest with the author or organization, is to notify the editor with the request to exclude him from the process of reviewing the given manuscript.
3.11. Feedback on the article is confidential. Full name of the peer reviewer is known by the responsible secretary and the editor-in-chief of the journal. This information could not be divulged.
4. Professional Ethics Guidelines for Editor-in-Chief
In the course of its activities the editor-in-chief is responsible for the publication of copyrighted works, which imposes the need to apply the following fundamental principles:
4.1. When deciding on publication, the editor-in-chief of the scientific journal is guided by the reliability of the data presentation and the scientific significance of the work under consideration.
4.2. The editor-in-chief is to evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship, social status or political preferences of authors.
4.3. Unpublished data obtained from the manuscripts submitted for consideration should not be used for personal purposes or transferred to third parties without the written consent of the author. Information or ideas received in the course of editing and related to possible benefits are to be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
4.4. The editor-in-chief is obliged not to allow the publication of information if there is sufficient reason to believe that it is plagiarism.
4.5. In the course of its activities the editor-in-chief shall:
– constantly improve the journal;
– follow the principle of freedom of expression;
– strive to meet the needs of readers and authors of the journal;
– exclude the influence of business interests or a policy of decision-making on publication of materials;
– decide on the publication of materials guided by the following main criteria: correspondence of the manuscript to the subject of the journal; relevance, novelty and scientific significance of the presented article; clarity of presentation of material; reliability of results and completeness of conclusions. The quality of the research and its relevance are the basis for the decision on its publication;
– take all reasonable measures to ensure the high quality of published materials and protect the privacy of personal information;
– take into account the recommendations of peer reviewers when making a final decision on the publication of the article. The responsibility for the decision on the publication is entirely on the editorial board of the journal;
– justify the decision on the acceptance or rejection of the article;
– provide the author of the peer-reviewed material with the opportunity to substantiate his research position;
– when the membership of the editorial board is changed, the decisions of the previous one on the publication of the material is not cancelled.
4.6. The editor-in-chief, together with the publisher, shall not leave claims regarding the manuscripts or published materials unanswered, and also in the event of a conflict situation, take all necessary measures to restore the violated rights.
5. Guidelines for the publication of articles
5.1. Compliance with the editorial ethics of the editorial board.
5.2. Compliance with guidelines for rejecting articles.
5.3. Maintaining the integrity of academic writing.
5.4. Prevention of damage to intellectual and ethical standards in the presence of commercial interests.
5.5. Readiness to publish corrections, clarifications, rejections and apologies when it is necessary.
5.6. Prevention of the publication of plagiarism and fraudulent data.
6. Conflict of interest
In order to avoid cases of violation of the publication ethics, it is necessary to exclude the conflict of interest of all parties contributed to the process of publishing the manuscript. Conflict of interest arises if the author, peer reviewer or member of the editorial board has financial, scientific or personal relationships that may affect their actions. Such relationships are called dual obligations, competing interests or competing loyalties.
In order to prevent conflict of interest and in accordance with accepted ethical guidelines of the journal, each of the parties is charged with the following duties.
The editor is obliged:
– to transfer the manuscript for consideration to another member of the editorial board, provided that the originally designated peer reviewer has a conflict of interest with the author of the submitted manuscript;
– to request from all participants involved in the process of publishing the manuscript information on the possibility of the emergence of competing interests;
– to make a decision on publication of information indicated in the author's letter concerning a conflict of scientific and / or financial interests, if it is not confidential and may influence the evaluation of published work by the reader or the scientific community;
– to ensure the publication of corrections, if information on a conflict of interest was obtained after the publication of the article.
The author is obliged:
– to indicate the place in his work and the source of research funding.
Peer reviewer is obliged:
– to inform the editor-in-chief about the existence of a conflict of interest (dual obligations, competing interests) and to refuse from the examination of the manuscript.
In the event of the violation of the publication ethics on the part of the editor, the author or the peer reviewer, a mandatory investigation is required. This applies to both published and unpublished material. The editorial board is obliged to demand clarification, without involving persons who may have a conflict of interest with one of the parties.