Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

The editorial office and editorial board of the journal follows main publication ethics standards of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, Core practices), Elsevier Publishing Ethics and the recommendations of the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine on prevention of academic plagiarism and its identification in research publications.

The editorial office and editorial board considers unacceptable any violations of academic integrity [1]:

  • academic plagiarism – release (completely or partially) of scientific results obtained by other individuals as results of one’s own research and/or reproduction of published texts of other authors without attribution;
  • self-plagiarism – release (completely or partially) of one’s own scientific results that have been published earlier as new scientific results;
  • fabrication – devising data or facts used in educational process or scientific research;
  • falsification – conscious substitution or modification of existing data regarding the educational process or scientific research;
  • deceit – provision of knowingly false information regarding one’s own scientific activity.

[1] The Law of Ukraine № 2145-VIII of September, 05, 2017 «On Education», Article 42, part 4.

The editorial office accepts entirely original papers that have not been published elsewhere in any language.

Reviewers’ Ethics

  1. The editorial board strives to comply with high ethical standards of academic research. Reviews must be done at the proper academic level as well as comply with ethical requirements applied to this type of academic activity.
  2. The editorial board evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors.
  3. A selected reviewer who feels that his or her subject of research does not correspond to the topic of the proposed article may refuse to review it.
  4. The reviewer shall report to the editorial office on any conflict of interest caused by competition or other relationships with any of the authors or organizations associated with the submitted manuscript and shall refuse to consider it.
  5. Reviewers may not use any information presented by the author in the papers they review.
  6. If the reviewer doubts about the author’s observing the academic integrity, he or she should immediately contact the editorial office with the request to review the article collectively. The reviewer must substantiate any academic integrity violation claims by appropriate references.
  7. Reviews should be carried out within time limits set by the editorial office (usually within thirty days).