Ethics

The peer review in journals is not only the most accessible way of scholar communication, but also is a significant contribution to the development of the relevant field of scholarly knowledge. In this regard, Editors, Reviewers and Authors are to comply with the ethical standards.

1. For the Editors of the Journal.

The Decision to Publish the Article

The Editorial Board has the right to accept the article for publishing or reject it. The article may be rejected by the Editor at the stage preceding the review, if there is a proper reason (e.g., the subject of the article does not correspond to the subject of the Journal; the article is obviously of low quality; the article was previously published in another journal; the submitted materials revealed a fundamental contradiction to the ethical standards). The Editor accepts an article for publication on the basis of his opinion on if the reviewed article complies with the requirements

of the Journal. At the same time, the Editorial Board reserves the right to reject articles for publication with no explanation.

The Fairness

The Editors of the Journal review submitted articles based on their intellectual content, regardless of the Author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnic origin, citizenship or political views.

Confidentiality

The Editors of the Journal and the members of the Editorial Board may not disclose information about the submitted manuscript to anyone, except for the corresponding Author, Reviewers, potential Reviewers, consultants of the Editorial Board, as well as the publisher. 

Disclosure and the Conflict of Interest

Unpublished work in the submitted article should not be used for any of the Editors’ own research without the written consent of the Author. Confidential information or ideas obtained during reviewing should be kept in secret and not used for any personal gain. The Editor should withdraw from his or her participation in the review (e.g., instead of giving his or her personal review, he or she may ask the co-Editor, the Editor-in-Chief deputy or any other member of the Editorial Board to perform the review) if there is a conflict of interest arising from competition, cooperation or other relations with any of the Authors, companies or institutions related to the article. The Editor should require all Journal Authors to disclose relevant conflicts of interest and make relevant corrections if a conflict of interest has been exposed after the publication. If necessary, other appropriate action may be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern. For the Journal’s annexes, the same level of peer review as for the main content of the Journal is to be provided. Articles in annexes to the Journal should be considered separately on the basis of their scholar value and interest to readers, but not for commercial reasons. Non-reviewed sections of the Journal should be clearly marked.

Ethical Complaints

The Editor of the Journal should take reasonably prompt action when ethical complaints are received in respect to a submitted manuscript or a published article. Such measures usually include contacting with the Author of the manuscript or the article and due consideration of the relevant complaint, but may also include further contact with relevant institutions and academic organizations, and, if the complaint is confirmed, the publication of a correction, rebuttal, expression of concern or other relevant comment. Every reported case of unethical behavior in publication should be investigated, even if it was exposed years after publication.

2. For Reviewers

Participation in making the decisions of the Editorial Board

Reviewing helps the Editor in making a decision on publishing of the submitted article, and through the communication of the Editorial Board with the Author, it may also help the Author to revise his or her article. The peer review is an essential element of official scholarly interaction and is an integral part of the scholarly method. Promptness Each selected Reviewer who feels incompetent to review the scholar research presented in the manuscript, or who knows that its prompt review is impossible, should notify the Editor and exclude himself from the reviewing process. Confidentiality Each manuscript submitted for the review should be treated as a confidential document. It should not be shown or discussed with other persons except those Authorized by the Editor. 

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be carried out objectively. Any personal attacks on the Author are inadmissible. The Reviewer should express his or her point of view clearly and reasonably. 

Recognition of Sources

If no reference has been made to any published work by the Authors, the Reviewer should note this fact. Any statement that any information, conclusion or argument has already been mentioned in the scholar sources must be accompanied by an appropriate reference. The Reviewer should also draw the attention of the Editor in case of any significant similarity or

partial coincidence between the manuscript in question and any other published work known to him personally. Disclosure and the Conflict of Interest Unpublished work in the submitted article should not be used for any of the Editors’ own research without the written consent of the Author. Confidential information or ideas obtained in reviewing should be kept in secret and not used for personal gain. The Editor should withdraw from his or her participation in the review if there is a conflict of interest arising from competition, cooperation or other relations with any of the Authors, companies or institutions related to the article.

3. For Authors

Publishing Standards

Authors of original articles should provide an accurate description of the work performed, as well as an objective explanation of its significance. The information on the article should be accurately presented. The article should contain the proper amount of detailed information and references for others to follow the path of the research. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements incompatible with the ethics standards are unacceptable. 

Access to Information and its Retention

Authors may be asked to submit sources related to their work (such as references) for the editorial review, and Authors should be prepared to provide public access to these sources if possible. This information should be retained for a reasonable time after the publication of the article. 

Originality and Plagiarism

The Authors of the article must ensure that they have written a completely original article, and if the Authors have used the work and / or words of other Authors, this should be appropriately noted by references or indicated in the text. Plagiarism takes many forms, from giving out someone else's work as his or her own to copying or paraphrasing essential parts of someone else's work (without reference to the source), as well as claiming one’s rights to the results obtained in research performed by others. Plagiarism in all its forms is an unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, Duplicate or Simultaneous publications

As a rule, Authors should not publish more than one article that describes the same research. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. The Author should not submit an already published article for consideration to another journal. Sometimes it is permissible to publish in more than one journal certain types of articles (such as translation), but subject to the requirements: the Authors and the Editor of the published work must agree to re-publication, which must be identical in terms of the data presented and their interpretation of the original document. A re-publication should make a reference to the originally published article.

Recognition of Sources

The work of other researchers must be properly recognized. Authors should provide references to publications that have influenced the content of the described work. Information obtained privately, such as in conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties, should not be used or reported without the express written consent by the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential activities, such as reviewing manuscripts or grant applications, should not be used without an express written consent from the Author of the work involved in such confidential activities. 

Authorship

Authorship of the article should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, planning, execution or interpretation of the study. All persons who have made a significant contribution should be listed as co-Authors. If a person has participated in any significant part of the project, he / she should be thanked or included in the list of co-Authors. The Author submitting the article for publishing must ensure that all valid co-Authors are included in the list of co-Authors of the article, as well as that all co-Authors read and approve the final version of the work, and that they agree to submit the article for publishing. 

Disclosure and the Conflict of Interest

All Authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other material conflict of interest that could be construed to influence the evaluation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed. Potential conflicts of interest should be exposed as soon as possible.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

If an Author finds a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her published work, it is his or her duty to immediately notify the Editor of the Journal about it and to cooperate with the Editor in order to publish the corrected version of the article. If the Editor learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the responsibility of the Author to promptly refute or correct the article, or to provide the Editor with a proof of the published work correctness.