Approved by the decision of the extraordinary scientific Council
of M.Utemissov WKSU from 12.07.2019, Protocol No. 10

 

EDITORIAL ETHICS

of scientific journal «Bulletin of WKSU»

The editorial Board of the scientific journal "Bulletin of WKSU" (hereinafter – the Journal) take a responsible approach to the task of maintaining a scientific reputation. The journal publishes scientific papers and is responsible for their compliance with the highest standards. The editorial Board of the journal does its best to comply with the ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community and to prevent any violations of these standards.

This document is compiled in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on ethics of scientific publications (Committee of Publication Ethics), taking into account the experience of leading international Publishers and Editorial boards of journals.

1. DUTIES OF THE EDITOR-IN-CHIEF AND MEMBERS OF EDITORIAL BOARD

1.1. Decision for publication

1.1.1. The editor-in-chief (hereinafter – Editor) of the journal is personally and independently responsible for making a decision for publication. The reliability of the work in question and its scientific significance should always be at the heart of the decision for publication. The editor is guided by the policy of the editorial Board of the journal, being limited to current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright, legality and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other members of the Editorial Board and Reviewers during the decision on publication.

1.2. Impartiality

1.2.1. The editorial Board should evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, citizenship or political preferences of the Authors.

1.3. Privacy

1.3.1. The editor and other members of the Editorial Board should not disclose any information about the accepted manuscript to third parties. If necessary, it is allowed to disclose information about the accepted manuscript only to Authors, Reviewers, possible Reviewers, other consultants of the Editorial Board and the Publisher.

1.4. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest

1.4.1. Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts should not be used in the works of members of the Editorial Board without the written consent of the Author. Information and/or ideas obtained in reviewing manuscripts should be kept confidential and may not be used to their advantage by people who have received access to the manuscripts.

1.4.2. Members of the Editorial Board should refuse to consider the manuscript (namely, to ask the Editor, Deputy editor or other members of the Editorial Board to consider the received manuscript instead of them) in case of a conflict of interest of the author in the presence of competition, joint works or other relationships and relations with any of the Authors, companies and possibly other organizations related to this manuscript.

1.5. Control over publications

1.5.1. A member of the Editorial Board who provides convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions presented in the publication are erroneous should inform the Editor (and/or the Editorial Board of the journal) in order to promptly notify the changes, withdraw the publication, Express concern and other relevant statements.

1.6. Research engagement and collaboration

1.6.1. The editorial Board of the journal takes adequate response measures in case of ethical claims concerning the reviewed manuscripts or published materials. Such measures generally include interaction with the Authors of the manuscript or published article and the argumentation of the relevant complaint or claim, but may also involve interactions with relevant organizations and research centers.

2. DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

2.1. Influence on Editorial Board decisions

2.1.1. Reviewing helps the editorial Board of the journal to make a decision on publication and through appropriate interaction with the Authors can help the Author to improve the quality of the work. Peer review is a necessary link in formal scientific communications, which is at the heart of the scientific approach. The editorial Board of the journal shares the view that all scientists who want to contribute to the publication are obliged to perform essential work on reviewing the manuscript.

2.2. Duty performance

2.2.1. Any selected Reviewer who feels that he is not qualified to review the manuscript or does not have enough time to do the work quickly should notify the Editorial Board and ask to be excluded from the review process of the relevant manuscript.

2.3. Privacy

2.3.1. Any manuscript received for peer review should be treated as a confidential document. This work cannot be opened and discussed with any persons who do not have the authority of the Editorial Board.

2.4. Manuscript requirements and objectivity

2.4.1. The reviewer is obliged to give an objective assessment. Personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their opinions in a clear and reasoned manner.

2.5. Recognition of primary sources

2.5.1. Reviewers should pay attention of authors to significant works of other researchers corresponding to the subject of the reviewed manuscript and not specified in the bibliographic list to it. Any statement used in the manuscript (observation, conclusion or argument) taken from previously published materials must be accompanied by an appropriate bibliographic reference. The reviewer should also draw the attention of the Editorial Board to the discovery of any significant similarity or coincidence between the manuscript in question and any other published work known to the Reviewer.

2.6. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest

2.6.1. Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts should not be used in the personal interests of the Reviewer without the written consent of the Author. The confidentiality of information and ideas obtained during the review of manuscripts should be maintained. This information and ideas cannot be used in the personal interests of the Reviewer.

2.6.2. Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts in case of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations associated with the submitted work.

3. RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORS

3.1. Requirements to the manuscripts

3.1.1. The scientific article should contain the results of original research. Authors should provide an accurate description of the work performed and objective evidence of its significance. Data confirming the results of the study should be given in the article as accurately as possible. The work should contain sufficiently detailed information and bibliographic references for possible reproduction of the described results. False and knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are considered unacceptable.

3.2. Data access and storage

3.2.1. For editorial review, authors may be asked for intermediate (raw) data related to the manuscript. Authors should be prepared to provide free access to such information in accordance with ALPSP-STM Statementon Data and Databases, if feasible. In any case, Authors should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

3.3. Originality and plagiarism

3.3.1. Authors should provide only completely original works. In the case of use of works or statements by other authors, such works or statements should be cited or noted accordingly.

3.3.2. Plagiarism can exist in many forms: from presenting someone else's work as author's to copying or paraphrasing essential parts of someone else's work (without indicating authorship) and to claiming their own rights to the results of someone else's research. Plagiarism in any form is unethical and unacceptable.

3.4. Multiplicity, redundancy and simultaneity of publications

3.4.1. In General, an Author should not publish a manuscript mostly devoted to the same research in more than one journal as an original publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is perceived as unethical behavior and unacceptable.

3.4.2. In general, the Author should not submit a previously published article to another journal for consideration.

3.4.3. The publication of a certain type of article (e.g. environmental recommendations, translated articles) in more than one journal is in some cases ethical, subject to certain conditions. Authors and Editors of interested journals must agree to a secondary publication that necessarily presents the same data and interpretations as in the originally published work. The bibliography of the primary work should be presented in the second publication. More information about the acceptable forms of secondary (repeated) publications can be found on the page www.icmje.org.

3.5. Recognition of primary sources

3.5.1. The contribution of others should always be recognized. Authors should refer to publications that are relevant to the performance of the proposed work. Data obtained in private, such as through conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties, should not be used or presented without the Express written permission of the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources, such as the evaluation of manuscripts or the granting of grants, should not be used without the Express written permission of the Authors of the work related to confidential sources.

3.6. Authorship of the publication

3.6.1. The authors of the publication can be only persons who have made a significant contribution to the formation of the idea of the work, the development, execution or interpretation of the presented research. All those who have made significant contributions should be designated as co-Authors. Where study participants have made a significant contribution in a particular area in a research project, they should be listed as having made a significant contribution to the study.

3.6.2. Responsible for correspondence with the editorial Board, the Author should ensure that all participants contributed to the study presented as co-authors and are not listed as co-authors those who were not involved in the study, and will also make sure that all Coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.

3.7. Risks, as well as people and animals that are the objects of research

3.7.1. If the work involves the use of chemical products, procedures or equipment, the operation of which may be any unusual risk, the Author should clearly indicate this in the manuscript.

3.7.2. If animals or humans are expected to participate as research subjects, Authors should make sure that the manuscript indicates that all stages of the study comply with the laws and regulations of research organizations, as well as approved by the relevant committees. The manuscript should clearly reflect that all the people who became the objects of research, received consent to conduct this study. Privacy rights must always be respected.

3.8. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest

3.8.1. All Authors are required to disclose in their manuscripts financial or other existing conflicts of interest that may be perceived as having an impact on the results or conclusions presented in the work.

3.8.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that must be disclosed include employment, consulting, stock ownership, royalties, expert opinions, patent applications or patent registrations, grants, and other financial security. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed as early as possible.

3.9. Significant errors in published works

3.9.1. If the Author finds significant errors or inaccuracies in the publication, the Author should inform the Editorial Board of the journal and interact with the Editorial Board in order to withdraw the publication or correct errors as soon as possible. If the Editorial Board of the journal has received information from a third party that the publication contains significant errors, the Author is obliged to withdraw the work or correct the errors as soon as possible.

4. DUTIES OF THE PUBLISHER

4.1. The publisher must follow the principles and procedures that facilitate the ethical responsibilities of the Editor, members of the Editorial Board, Reviewers and Authors in accordance with these requirements. The publisher must be sure that the potential profits from advertising or reprints did not affect the decisions of the Editorial Board.

4.2. The publisher shall support the editorial Board of the journal in the consideration of claims to the ethical aspects of the published materials and help to interact with other journals and/or Publishers, if this contributes to the performance of the duties of the Editorial Board.

4.3. The publisher should promote good research practices and implement industry standards to improve ethical guidelines, exemption procedures and error correction.

4.4. The publisher must provide appropriate specialized legal support (opinion or advice) if necessary.