Publication Ethics

Ethic obligations of Authors

  1. The basic duty of an author consists in giving the exact description of the conducted research, and also objectively present its scientific novelty and practical meaningfulness.
  2. The authors of articles carry all responsibility for maintenance of the articles and fact of their publication.
  3. Every author is under an obligation to use reasonably and economy the volume of Collection, as it is the limited resource.
  4. Primary report about the results of a research must be complete enough and contain necessary references to the accessible information generators, that specialists in this area were able to recreate this experiment.
  5. An author must necessarily quote those publications which carried out qualified influence on the essence of scientific problem, and also those of them, which can provide the operative acquaintance of a reader with previous works of scientists, important for understanding of this research. An author must minimize quoting of works, which do not have direct attitude toward maintenance of the article. An author is under the obligation to conduct a scientifically-literary search, to find and quote original publications, in which the researches, closely associated with his article, are described.
  6. An author should avoid fragmentation of reports about a research. A scientist who executes multivectorial researches of the system or group of the family systems must structure a publication in a way, that every fragment of description of the advanced study provides a fully complete report on every aspect of global analysis of a scientific problem.
  7. An author has no right to give manuscripts which describe the same results, more than in one journal as a primary publication, if it isn’t only the one, resubmitting of declined by Collection or the manuscript recalled by an author. It is possible to present the manuscript of the complete new article which extends the published previous manuscript of the same research having done before. However, at presentation of such manuscript it is necessary to inform an editor about the existence of the previous article which necessarily must be quoted by an author in this new manuscript.
  8. An author must clearly name all sources of quoted or given in the article information, except for well-known facts.
  9. The co-authors of the article must be only those persons who did a considerable scientific contribution to the given work and divide responsibility for the got results. An author who gives a manuscript to the publication takes the responsibility for including into the list of co-authors all those and only those persons who answer the requirements of authorship. In article, written by a few authors, the authors, who give pin information to the editorship carries out the correspondence with editors, undertakes responsibility for the consent of other authors of the article to its publication in the Collection.

Ethic obligations of Editors

  1. All materials given for publication pass a careful selection and criticizing. Editorial board of the Сollection reserves a right to decline the article or return it on a revision.
  2. An Editor must without prejudice examine all manuscripts, presented to the publication, estimating each properly, without regard to racial, confessional, national and political belonging, and also social position or job of author (-ors).
  3. An editor must as quick as possible examine manuscripts, presented to the publication.
  4. All responsibility for an acceptance or rejection of a manuscript to the publication lies exceptionally on an editor. The responsible and impartial going provides for near implementation of these duties, that an editor takes into account recommendation of a reviewer – specialist of corresponding scientific area – in relation to quality and authenticity of manuscript, given to the publication.
  5. An editor and members of Editorial Board give no information to other persons, related to maintenance of manuscript which is on consideration, except persons which participate in professional estimation of the real article. After the positive decision of editor the article is published in Collection and placed on its webpage in language of original and necessarily English, and also passed on the corresponding electronic resources of library named after V. І. Vernadskyi and placed on the web sites of international scientifically-metrical bases Web of Science Core Collection.
  6. The Editorship carries no responsibility before authors and/or third persons and organizations for a possible loss, caused by the publication of the article. The Editorial Board has a right to withdraw the already prepared to the publication article, if it will turn out that in the process of writing of the article somebody’s rights or generally accepted norms of scientific ethics were broken. About the fact of article exception the editorship informs the author, which gave the article, and also person which recommends, and organization, where the work was produced.

Ethic obligations of Reviewers

  1. A reviewer always must objectively estimate the quality of a manuscript, its experimental and theoretical parts, interpretation and exposition of the material, and also to take into account, how maintenance of the article answers the scientific and stylistic standards.
  2. A reviewer must take into account a possibility of conflict of interests in the case when a manuscript is given to him close related to his current or published work. If there are doubts, a reviewer must at once turn a manuscript without a review, saying about the conflict of interests.
  3. A reviewer has no right to estimate a manuscript, when he has the personal or professional correlations with an author or the co-author, and if such relations can influence on judgement about the publication of manuscript.
  4. A reviewer must apply a manuscript which is the subject for criticizing, as a confidential document: not to show a manuscript to the other persons, not to discuss about it with other colleagues except special cases, when a reviewer requires somebody’s special consultation.
  5. Reviewers must adequately explain and argue reasoning in relation to the article, for editors’ and authors’ understanding, their remarks are based on. Any statement that certain supervisions, conclusions, arguments and others like were already published, must be accompanied by a reference to the corresponding source.
  6. A reviewer must give a review in time.
  7. Reviewers have no authority to use or expose unpublished information, arguments or interpretations which are contained in this article, if there is not a consent of the author on it.