The legal basis for ensuring the publication ethics is comprised by international standards: the provisions adopted at the 2nd World Conference on the Fair Practice of Scientific Research (Singapore, July 22-24, 2010); the provisions developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the norms of Chapter 70, "Copyright", of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
The author is obliged to submit the initial materials (data) of the research at the request of the editorial staff, if the article does not contain the initial data, and should be ready to provide public access to them. The author must store this data within a reasonable time after publication for the possibility of their reproduction and verification.
The author submits an article containing the results of the original study for the editorial staff consideration. If the author used the works of other persons or includes fragments from works (quotes) of other persons in his article, such use should be properly drawn up by indicating the original source in the bibliographic list for the article. Plagiarism, as well as autoplagiarism, in any form is unethical and unacceptable behavior of the author.
The author submits to the editorial staff a manuscript of the article that has neither been previously published nor transmitted to the editorial staffs of other journals. To simultaneously submit the manuscript to several journals is unethical and unacceptable. The same applies to translating an article into a foreign language.
The author undertakes to correctly indicate in the bibliography the scientific and other sources that he used in the course of the study and which had a significant impact on the results of the study. Information obtained from unofficial (private) sources should not be used in the preparation of a scientific article.
All persons who made a significant contribution to obtaining the results of the study should be listed as co-authors of the article. The list of authors should be limited only to these persons.
The author submitting the manuscript guarantees that all co-authors are indicated by him, that they all have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agree with its submission to the editors of the scientific journal for publication.
Authors should disclose conflicts of interest that may affect the evaluation and interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project (grants, government programs, projects, etc.) should be disclosed and must be indicated in the manuscript.
If the author finds a significant error or inaccuracy in the already published article, then he must immediately notify the editorial staff and assist them in correcting the error. If the editorial staff finds out about a mistake from third parties, then the author is obliged to immediately fix the error or provide evidence of its absence.
ETHICS OF SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS
The editorial staff of the journal decides which of the articles submitted to the editorial staff should be published on the basis of the results of the assessment for compliance with the preparation requirements and the results of the review.
When deciding to publish a manuscript, the editorial staff acts in accordance with the journal policy and does not allow publication of articles with signs of libel, insult, plagiarism or copyright infringement. The final decision about whether to publish an article or refuse to do so is taken by the editor-in-chief of the journal.
The editors evaluate the manuscripts of the submitted articles irrespective of race, sex, nationality, origin, citizenship (allegiance), occupation, place of work and residence of an author, and also of his political, philosophical, religious and other views.
The editors undertake not to disclose information about the submitted manuscript to anyone except the author, the reviewer (in case of a single-blind review), and, if necessary, the publisher.
The editors guarantee that the materials of the manuscript rejected for publication will not be used in the researches of members of the editorial staff without the written consent of the author. The editorial staff shall refuse to review the manuscript if it is in any competitive relationship with the author or organization associated with the results of the study, or there is another conflict of interest. The editorial staff undertakes to require all participants in the process of publishing an article to disclose competing interests.
The editorial staff promptly examines every claim of unethical behavior of authors of the manuscripts and already published articles, regardless of the time of its receipt. The editors undertake to take adequate reasonable measures with respect to such claims. If the arguments of the claim are confirmed, the editorial staff has the right to refuse publication of the article, to cease further cooperation with the author, publish a corresponding retraction, and take other necessary measures to further suppress the unethical behavior of this author.
ETHICS OF REVIEWING SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS
The expert evaluation of the manuscript provided by the reviewer contributes to the decision-making of the editorial staff, and also helps the author to improve the manuscript. The decision on whether to accept the manuscript for publication, to return it to the author for revision or to reject it from publication is accepted by the editorial staff on the basis of the results of the review.
The reviewer is obliged to provide a review within the timeframe indicated by the editors. If the consideration of the manuscript and the preparation of a review in these terms are impossible, the reviewer must notify the editorial office thereof.
The manuscript submitted for review should be considered as a confidential document, regardless of the review form chosen by the journal. The reviewer has the right to show it or discuss it with other persons only with the permission of the editor-in-chief.
The reviewer undertakes to conduct an expert evaluation of the manuscript objectively. Personal criticism of the author by the reviewer is impermissible. All conclusions of the reviewer should be strictly argued and provided with references to authoritative sources.
Reviewers should indicate (if there are any) the works which influenced the results of the study, but were not provided by the author. The reviewer is obliged to draw the attention of the editorial staff to the substantial similarity or coincidence between the manuscript reviewed and the other work previously published and known to the reviewer.
The reviewer cannot use the materials of an unpublished manuscript in his own studies without the written consent of the author. The reviewer is obliged to refuse to examine the manuscript, in connection with which he has a conflict of interest because of competitive, joint or other relations with the author or organization related to the manuscript.