Publication ethics

PUBLICATION ETHICS GUIDELINES

Editorial board of the journal 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, Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK) for editors (Elsevier), and joins the important experience of reputable international publishers such as Taylor & Francis, Elsevier, Springer and others.

The journal’s Editorial Board has taken measures to ensure high ethical and professional standards based on Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. The journal is committed to ensuring diversity, equity, and inclusion in its editorial team and decision-making processes. All submissions are treated in the strictest confidence, and each is judged on its merits without regard to seniority or institutional affiliation. We do not discriminate based on race, color, ancestry, national origin, religion or creed, mental or physical disability, medical condition, genetic information, sex (including pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions), sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age, marital status, military or protected veteran status, citizenship, or any other protected characteristic.

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.

 

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.

 

 

PROFESSIONAL ETHICS GUIDELINES FOR THE AUTHOR

Author (or a team of authors) when submitting materials to a scientific journal “Bulletin of Alfred Nobel University. Series: Philology” 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.

 

ETHICAL CONCEPT OF REVIEWING

Reviewing of materials submitted to the journal is carried out in order to ensure proper ethical standards of scientific research. In the principles of peer review, the editors of the professional publication are guided by the requirements of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the experience of leading scientific communities in order to improve the quality of published articles and overcome bias in case of rejection of materials.

The editorial board of the journal keeps confidential any information about the manuscript submitted for scientific review.

Ethical norms, which should be guided by the subjects of the review process:

• the author and the reviewer are equally responsible for the originality and authenticity of the material submitted for publication;
• the task of the reviewer is to objectively assess the submitted article and determine its compliance with scientific standards;
• the reviewer's confidence in his own qualifications for reviewing the proposed research and the absence of a conflict of interest (which he informs the editorial board about);
• lack of professional and personal ties between the author and the reviewer (subordination, scientific management or co-authorship) that may influence the reviewer's judgment (in this case, the reviewer is obliged to refuse the review, the author of the proposed material may indicate an undesirable reviewer);
• preserving the confidentiality of the content of the reviewed article (exception – the need for a special consultation, for which the permission of the editorial board is required);
• argumentativeness and adequacy of the substantiation of the reviewer's remarks in case of plagiarism or incorrect citation;
• high self-discipline of authors and reviewers, which consists in timely submission of materials;
• mutual respect of reviewing and publishing subjects.

The author of the article is responsible for copyright infringement and disregard of current standards. The author and the reviewer are responsible for the reliability of the given facts and data, the validity of the conclusions and recommendations, and the scientific and practical level of the article.

 

VIOLATIONS

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.

GUIDELINES IN CASE OF RETRACTION OR CORRECTIONS

Editors’ Responsibilities

In case of misconduct, the journal editor is responsible for resolving the issue. He or she can work in conjunction with the other co-editor, members of the editorial board and international scientific board, peer reviewers, and experts in the field.

Documentation

The issue will be documented accordingly. All factual questions should be documented: who, what, when, where, why. All relevant documents should be kept, in particular the article(s) concerned.

Due Process for Authors

The journal editor shall contact the author or publication involved, either the author submitting to journal or another publication or author. The author is thus given the opportunity to respond to or comment on the complaint, allegation, or dispute.

Data Access and Retention

Where appropriate, editors encourage authors to share the data that supports research publications. Research data refers to the results of observations or experimentation that validate research findings. Editors encourage authors to state the availability of their data in a data statement attached to the submitted article. With the data statement, authors can be transparent about the data they used in the article.

Fair Play and Editorial Independence

Editor-in-Chief evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study's validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.

Confidentiality

Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editor-in-Chiefand Editorial Board will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the Editorial Board to handle the manuscript.

Publication Decisions

The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations

Editors (in conjunction with the publisher and/or society) will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. Journal editors follow the COPE Flowcharts when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct. If, on investigation, the ethical concern is well-founded, a correction, retraction, expression of concern or other note as may be relevant, will be published in the journal.

Appropriate Corrections

In the event that misconduct has or seems to have occurred, or in the case of needed corrections, the editorial board deals with the different cases by following the appropriate COPE Recommendations. Great care will be taken to distinguish cases of honest human error from deliberate intent to defraud. COPE states that:

1. Journal editors should consider retracting a publication if they have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error). Retraction is also appropriate in cases of redundant publication, plagiarism, and unethical research.
2. Journal editors should consider issuing an expression of concern if:

(1) they have reason to believe that there has been research or publication misconduct by the authors but have insufficient evidence,

(2) there is evidence that the findings are unreliable but the authors’ institution will not investigate the case,

(3) they believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication either has not been, or would not be, fair, impartial or conclusive,

(4) or an investigation is underway but a judgement will not be available for a considerable time.

Retraction and eliminating of publication ethics violations algorithm

Retraction of a published scientific is a method for correcting published information and signaling to readers that a scientific article contains significant errors or inaccurate data that cannot be relied upon. These inaccuracies can arise from both unintentional mistakes and deliberate violations. Retraction is employed to notify readers of potential instances of publication duplication (when an author submits the same data in multiple publications), plagiarism, and conflicts of interest that could impact the interpretatio n or recommendations derived from the data. The primary purpose of retraction is to correct published information and maintain its integrity rather than to punish authors who committed violations.

Reasons and grounds for article recall should be clearly explained.

The article is being recalled as it violates the ethical principles of the Journal.

Editors, reviewers or readers have the right to take reasonable measures when they suspect or they see any violations of publication ethics. If the editorial board or reviewer finds dishonesty in the materials of the article, they should act in accordance with the specifics of the identified violations:

• suspected fabricated data in a submitted manuscript
• reviewer suspects undisclosed conflict of interest in a submitted manuscript
• suspected an ethical problem in a submitted manuscript
• suspicion that the proposed surname does not actually correspond to co-authorship, indicates that the co-authorship is fictitious
• signs that might indicate authorship problems

If readers find bad faith in their publications, they should proceed with the following algorithms in each cases according to a flowchart:

• suspected plagiarism in a published manuscript
• suspected fabricated data in a published manuscript
• suspected undisclosed conflict of interest in a published article
• a reader suspects a reviewer has appropriated an author’s ideas or data

Retractions should occur after the journal’s editors have carefully considered appeals received from the editors, authors, or readers.