Editorial ethics
The editorial office of the journal is guided by international standards of publishing ethics COPE Code of Conduct as well as by norms set forth in the Code of Ethics of a scientist of Ukraine.
◼︎ The editorial office is guided by ethical norms, the list of which is not limited to the following, but necessarily includes:
Impartiality.
When making a decision on the publication of a scientific research, the editorial office of the journal is impartial and is guided by the reliability of its scientific significance, evaluating the intellectual content of the research regardless of race, gender, religious beliefs, nationality, social status, linguistic, local and other criteria that discriminate against the author.
Confidentiality.
Unpublished data obtained from scientific researches and submitted for consideration are not used for personal purposes and are not transferred to third parties without the written consent of the author.
Ethical standards.
The editors of the journal should not allow a manuscript to be published if there is a sufficient reason to believe that it is plagiarism or contains information and / or ideas that may offend other authors, certain groups of people, as well as information and / or ideas aimed at inciting enmity.
Willingness for cooperation.
The editors of the journal must respond to appeals and claims regarding the reviewed scientific researches or already published papers / articles in the case of a conflict and take all necessary measures to restore violated copyright and related rights.
◼︎ Reviewers who evaluate scientific manuscripts sent for publication in the journal are guided by ethical norms, the list of which is not limited to the following, but necessarily includes:
Impartiality.
A scientific reviewer, who, in his opinion, does not have sufficient qualifications to evaluate the scientific manuscript, or cannot be objective, for example, in case of a conflict of interest with the author, should inform the editorial office with a request to exclude him from the review process of this manuscript.
Objectivity.
The reviewer is required to provide an objective and reasoned assessment of the stated results of the research. All comments of the reviewer of the paper / article should be explained in details and supported by explanations for revision.
Efficiency.
The reviewer has a moral obligation for promptly evaluation of the accepted scientific manuscript. In case of a situation in which further review is not possible or will be carried out with a significant delay and deviation from the deadlines, the reviewer must inform the editorial office of his exclusion from the process.
Confidentiality.
Each scientific manuscript, received for a review should be treated as a confidential document. It is not read and discussed with other persons.
Integrity.
The fact of no references in the scientific research, submitted for publication should be noted and evaluated by the reviewer. Cases of similarity or partial coincidence of the manuscript with publications known to the reviewer that are not referenced should be recorded.
◼︎ Authors submitting their scientific manuscripts for publication in the journal should be guided by the following ethical norms:
Reliability.
Authors of scientific manuscript should provide only reliable results of research; obviously false or falsified research and materials are unacceptable.
Compliance.
The manuscript, submitted for publication must meet the requirements formulated by the journal’s editorial office in electronic form using the submitting form on the website.
Originality and compliance with anti-plagiarism policies.
The author(s) of the manuscript must guarantee that they have submitted the original research for editorial examination. If the author used the researches or opinions of other scientists in the manuscript, it should be properly indicated. Plagiarism in any form (lack of graphic highlighting of citations, incorrect references and sources or an incomplete list of sources or bibliographic references, excessive citation, etc) is recognized as unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
Recognition of authorship and co-authorship.
If more than one person made a significant contribution to the development of the concept, planning, execution or interpretation of the described research, the author should indicate their co-authorship in the research; a person who has contributed to the research covered in the article in a certain way, but whose role is not so significant as to include him in the co-authors, only gratitude should be expressed in the research; changing the authorship after submitting the manuscript for editorial review contradicts the norms of academic integrity and the Code of Ethics of a Ukrainian scientist and is unacceptable.
Exposing a conflict of interest.
If there is a conflict of interest, including potential, the author or co-authors should inform the editorial office of the journal as soon as such a conflict or its possibility becomes known to the author or co-authors.
Exposing multiple or parallel publications.
If the author wishes to reprint or publish a scientific article in parallel, he must confirm that he does this not to increase the number of scientific publications, but only with the aim of promoting scientific achievements, if appropriate; the author must report the fact of repeated or parallel publication of the journal.
Exposing errors.
If the author(s) finds fundamental errors or inaccuracies in their research at the stage of its consideration or after its publication, they should inform the editorial office of journal as soon as possible and collaborate to publish a refutation or correction of the information.
