Ethics of Scientific Publications
Ethics of Scientific Publications
The editorial board of the multidisciplinary scientific journal «3-i intellect, idea, innovation» - adheres to the principles of publication ethics adopted by the international community, reflected in the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
The editorial board of the scientific journal adheres to the principles of publication ethics accepted by the international community, and also takes into account the valuable experience of authoritative international journals and publishers.
In order to avoid unfair practices in publishing (plagiarism, presentation of false information, etc.), in order to ensure high quality of scientific publications, public recognition of scientific results obtained by the author, each member of the editorial board, author, reviewer, publisher, as well as institutions involved in publishing process, are required to comply with ethical standards, norms and rules and take all reasonable measures to prevent violations. Compliance with the rules of ethics of scientific publications by all participants in this process helps to ensure the rights of authors to intellectual property, improve the quality of publications and eliminate the possibility of misuse of copyright materials in the interests of individuals.
The main terms used in this provision:
The ethics of scientific publications is a system of norms of professional behavior in the relationship between authors, reviewers, editors, publishers and readers in the process of creating, disseminating and using scientific publications.
An author is a person or a group of persons (a group of authors) involved in creating a publication of the results of a scientific research.
Editor-in-chief is the person who leads the editorial board and makes final decisions regarding the production and publication of the magazine.
Publisher - a legal entity or an individual issuing a scientific publication.
A scientific article is a completed and published author's work.
Plagiarism is the deliberate appropriation of authorship of someone else’s work of science or art, someone else’s ideas or inventions. Plagiarism may be a violation of copyright law and patent law and as such may result in legal liability.
Editor - a representative of a scientific journal or publishing house, preparing materials for publication, as well as supporting communication with authors and readers of scientific publications.
The editorial board is an advisory body from a group of authoritative persons that assists the editor-in-chief in the selection, preparation and evaluation of works for publication.
Reviewer - an expert acting on behalf of a scientific journal or publishing house and conducting a scientific examination of copyright materials in order to determine the possibility of their publication.
Manuscript - an author's work submitted for publication to the editorial office, but not published.
Reader - any person who has read the published materials.
1. The principles of professional ethics in the activities of the publisher
In its activities, the publisher is responsible for the publication of copyright works, which entails the need to follow the following fundamental principles and procedures:
1.1. Contribute to the performance of ethical responsibilities by the editors, the editorial and publishing group, the editorial board, reviewers and authors in accordance with these requirements.
1.2. Provide support to the journal’s editors in reviewing complaints about the ethical aspects of published materials and help interact with other magazines and / or publishers if this contributes to the duties of the editors.
1.3. Ensure the confidentiality of the publication received from the authors and any information until its publication.
1.4. Recognize that the activities of the magazine are not a commercial project and do not have the goal of making a profit.
1.5. Be prepared to publish corrections, clarifications, rebuttals, and apologies when necessary.
1.6. Provide the editorial board with the opportunity to exclude publications containing plagiarism and inaccurate data.
1.7. The publisher (editor) has the right to reject the manuscript or require the author to finalize it if it is framed with violations of the Rules adopted in this journal and agreed with the publisher.
1.8. An article, if accepted for publication, is publicly available; copyrights reserved by the authors.
1.9. Post information about the financial support of the study, if the author leads such information to the article.
1.10. If substantial, grammatical, stylistic and other errors are found, the editors undertake to take all measures to eliminate them.
1.11. To coordinate with the author the editorial proof introduced in the article.
1.12. Do not delay the release of the magazine.
2. Ethical principles that should guide the author of a scientific publication
When submitting materials to a scientific journal, authors (or a group of authors) are aware that they bear initial responsibility for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research, which implies the observance of the following principles:
2.1. Authors should provide reliable research results. Obviously erroneous or falsified statements are unacceptable.
2.2. Authors must ensure that the results of the study presented in the manuscript provided are completely original. Borrowed fragments or statements must be drawn up with the obligatory indication of the author and the source. Excessive borrowing, as well as plagiarism in any form, including informal quotes, paraphrasing or assignment of rights to the results of other people's research, is unethical and unacceptable. The presence of borrowing without reference will be considered by the editorial board as plagiarism.
2.3. Authors should cite only genuine facts and information in the manuscript; provide enough information to verify and repeat experiments by other researchers; Do not use information obtained privately without open written permission; Prevent fabrication and falsification of data.
2.4. Avoid 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 an earlier work and indicate the differences between the new work and the previous one.
2.5. Authors should not submit to the journal a manuscript that has been sent to another journal and is under consideration, as well as an article already published in another journal.
2.6. It is necessary to recognize the contribution of all persons who have somehow influenced the course of the study, in particular, the article should provide links to work that mattered during the study.
2.7. Authors must comply with ethical standards when criticizing or commenting on third-party research.
2.8. The co-authors of the article should indicate all persons who have made a significant contribution to the study. Among co-authors it is inadmissible to indicate persons who did not participate in the study.
2.9. Authors should respect the work of the editorial board and reviewers and eliminate these shortcomings or explain them reasonably.
2.10. Authors should submit and draw up the manuscript in accordance with 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 editors of the journal;
2.12. Authors must provide the editorial board or publisher with evidence of the correctness of the original article or correct significant errors if third party third parties know about them from the editorial board or publisher.
3. Ethical principles in the activities of the reviewer
The reviewer carries out a scientific examination of copyright materials, as a result of which his actions should be unbiased in nature, consisting in the implementation of the following principles:
3.1. The manuscript received for review should be considered as a confidential document that cannot be transferred for review or discussion to third parties who are not authorized by the editors.
3.2. Reviewers must be aware that the manuscripts sent to them are the intellectual property of the authors and relate to information not subject to disclosure. Violation of confidentiality is possible only if the reviewer claims that the materials contained in the article are unreliable or falsified;
3.3. The reviewer should draw the attention of the editor to the substantial or partial similarity of the manuscript being evaluated with any other work, as well as the facts of the absence of references to the provisions, conclusions or arguments previously published in other works of this or other authors.
3.4. The reviewer should note the relevant published works that are not cited (in the article).
3.5. The reviewer is obliged to give an objective and reasoned assessment of the stated results of the study and clearly based recommendations. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
3.6. The comments and suggestions of the reviewer should be objective and principled, aimed at improving the scientific level of the manuscript.
3.7. The reviewer must make decisions based on specific facts and provide evidence of his decision.
3.8. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of manuscripts for their needs.
3.9. Reviewers do not have the right to take advantage of knowledge of the content of the work before its publication.
3.10. A reviewer who, in his opinion, does not have sufficient qualifications to evaluate the manuscript, or cannot be objective, for example, in case of a conflict of interest with the author or organization, should inform the editor about this to request that he be excluded from the review process of this manuscript;
3.11. Feedback on the article is confidential. The name of the Reviewer is known to the executive secretary and the editor-in-chief of the journal. This information was not disclosed.
4. The principles of professional ethics in the activities of the chief editor
In his work, the chief editor is responsible for the publication of copyright works, which imposes the need to follow the following fundamental principles:
4.1. When deciding on publication, the chief editor of a scientific journal is guided by the reliability of the presentation of data and the scientific significance of the work under consideration.
4.2. The editor-in-chief should evaluate the intellectual content of the manuscripts regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship, social status or political preferences of the authors.
4.3. Unpublished data obtained from 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 during editing and related to potential benefits should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
4.4. The editor-in-chief should not allow information to be published if there is sufficient reason to believe that it is plagiarism.
4.5. The editor-in-chief in his activities undertakes:
- constantly improve the magazine;
- follow the principle of freedom of opinion;
- strive to meet the needs of readers and authors of the journal;
- exclude the influence of the interests of business or politics on decision-making on the publication of materials;
- decide on the publication of materials, guided by the following main criteria: the correspondence of the manuscript to the subject of the journal; relevance, novelty and scientific significance of the article; clarity of presentation; reliability of results and completeness of conclusions. The quality of the study and its relevance are the basis for the decision to publish;
- take all reasonable measures to ensure the high quality of published materials and protect the confidentiality of personal information;
- take into account the recommendations of reviewers when making the final decision on the publication of an article. Responsibility for the decision to publish lies entirely with the editorial board of the journal;
- substantiate its decision in case of acceptance or rejection of the article;
- provide the author of the peer-reviewed material with an opportunity to justify his research position;
- when changing the composition of the editorial board, do not cancel the decisions of the previous composition on the publication of the material.
4.6. The editor-in-chief together with the publisher should not leave unanswered claims regarding the reviewed manuscripts or published materials, as well as take all necessary measures to restore violated rights when a conflict situation is identified.
5. Guidelines for the publication of articles
5.1. Compliance with publishing ethics by the editorial board.
5.2. Compliance with guidelines for rejection of 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. Willingness to publish corrections, clarifications, rejections and apologies when necessary.
5.6. Prevention of the publication of plagiarism and fraudulent data.
6. Conflict of Interest
In order to avoid cases of violation of publication ethics, the conflict of interests of all parties involved in the publication of the manuscript should be excluded. A conflict of interest arises if the author, reviewer, or editorial board member has financial, scientific, or personal relationships that may affect their actions. Such relationships are called dual obligations, competing interests, or competing loyalty.
In order to prevent a conflict of interest and in accordance with the ethical standards of the journal, the following responsibilities are assigned to each of the parties.
The editor must:
- transfer the manuscript for consideration to another member of the editorial board if the originally appointed reviewer has a conflict of interest with the author of the submitted manuscript;
- request information from all participants in the process of publishing the manuscript about the possibility of the emergence of competing interests;
- decide on the publication of information specified in the author’s letter regarding a conflict of scientific and / or financial interests, if it is not confidential and may affect the assessment of the published work by the reader or the scientific community;
- ensure the publication of amendments if information on a conflict of interest was obtained after the publication of the article.
The author must:
- indicate the place of work and the source of funding for the study.
The reviewer must:
- inform the editor-in-chief about the existence of a conflict of interests (dual obligations, competing interests) and refuse to review the manuscript.
In the event of a violation of publication ethics by the editor, author or reviewer, a mandatory investigation is required. This applies to both published and unpublished materials. The editorial board is obliged to demand clarification, without involving persons who may have a conflict of interest from one of the parties.
If material containing significant inaccuracies has been published, it should be immediately corrected in a form accessible to readers and indexing systems.