Publication Ethics

The legal basis for ensuring publication ethics is formed by international standards: the provisions adopted by the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity (Singapore, July 22–24, 2010), regulations developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the norms of Chapter 70 “Copyright” of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

The Editorial Office of the online scientific journal “Pedagogical Bulletin of the Union State” (hereinafter referred to as the Editorial Office) guarantees observance:

• the Ethics of publishing academic publications;
• the Ethics of authorship of scientific publications;
• the Ethics of peer review of academic publications;
• the Ethics of editing academic publications.

Ethics of Publishing Academic Publications

The Editorial Office:

1. Guarantees consideration of all materials submitted for publication, maintaining editorial independence and integrity in making objective decisions without prejudice to authors based on national or religious affiliation, official position; regardless of commercial interests and relations with the Founder of the Journal; basing its policy on respect for the author’s personal rights and right to intellectual property.

2. Implements the Journal policy to ensure and improve the quality of published materials, making a significant contribution to the development of Russian and foreign science (field of knowledge); takes measures to intensify activities improving the quality of published material; strives to meet readers’ and authors’ needs.

3. Establishes the relevance, importance, clarity, reliability, validity of published research material as guiding principles for editorial activity.

4. Establishes the following as basic principles of high qualification of published research:

- thoroughness: the published results of the research should be of high quality and thoroughly in accordance with ethical and legal standards; the authors are collectively responsible for their work and the content of the publication;

- integrity: authors must present results honestly, without fabrication, falsification, or unfair manipulation of data;

- unambiguity: the publication must provide sufficient information for other researchers to replicate the experiments performed;

- completeness of the presented material: the review and conclusions from existing studies should be complete, balanced, and should include information whether or not it supports the hypotheses and interpretations of the publication author;

- deliberateness: the results of a new study should be presented in the context of the previous studies results;

- originality: the authors guarantee that the work offered for publication is original and has not been previously published anywhere in any language; the work cannot be sent to several editions simultaneously;

- transparency: the publication should list all sources of research funding, including direct and indirect financial support, providing of equipment or materials, and other types of support (including assistance from statisticians or technical writers);

5. Implements a policy to include highly qualified members who actively contribute to the development of the journal into the Editorial Board and Editorial Office;

6. Implements a policy of systematic improvement in the institutions of peer review, editing, and expert evaluation of publications to ensure accuracy, completeness, clarity, impartiality, and timeliness of peer review and research reporting;

7. In dealing with readers, ensures that information about research funding and sponsors of published research materials is communicated;

8. Ensures that measures are taken to ensure the consistency of published material, checks publications for image manipulation, plagiarism, duplicate or redundant publication using the special software;

9. Decides whether or not to accept the article for publication based on all the comments of the independent reviewers. The final editorial decision and the reasons for it are communicated to the authors.

Ethics of Authorship of Scientific Publications

Authors of publications:

- should ensure that only individuals who meet the criteria for authorship (i.e., who have made significant contributions to the work) are included in the list of authors, and that deserving researchers are not excluded from the list of authors;

- should agree to be added to their list of contributors and must approve the version of the work sent for publication; any changes to the list of contributors must be approved by all contributors, including those who are excluded from the list;

- should be familiar with the work to be published and ensure that it meets the requirements outlined above;

- should work with editors or publishers to correct their work as quickly as possible if errors or omissions are discovered after publication;

- should notify the Editorial Office immediately if they discover an error in any work submitted for publication, accepted for publication, or already published;

- may not copy from other publications references to works that they have not read themselves; citations and references to other works must be accurate and formed in accordance with the requirements;

- should refer as correctly and accurately as possible to previous works of other researchers and the authors themselves, referring first to the primary source; literal reproductions of one's own work and paraphrases are unacceptable and can only be used as a basis for new conclusions;

- indicating the authorship of data, text, figures and ideas that the author received from other sources is necessary – they should not be presented as belonging to the author of the publication; direct quotations from the works of other researchers should be highlighted by quotation marks and reference;

- should comply with copyright laws; copyrighted material (such as tables, figures, or large quotations) may only be reproduced with the permission of their owners.

Ethics of Peer Review of Academic Publications

1. The Editorial Office guarantees an independent review of materials ensuring the integrity and objectivity of the statement regarding the scientific value of the article to be published.

2. In accordance with the Journal policy the Editorial Office establishes the procedure for reviewing the materials submitted for publication.

3. The Editorial Office guarantees to ensure a fair and proper process of independent reviewing.

4. The Editorial Office reserves the right to reject material without independent review if it is deemed of low quality or inappropriate for the Journal's readers. This decision is made in a fair and unbiased manner, taking into account the editorial policy of the Journal.

5. The Editorial Office uses the services of independent reviewers for materials considered for publication, selecting experts with sufficient experience and without conflict of interest.

6. Independent reviewers are advised of the requirements and are informed of any changes in editorial policies.

7. If reviewers have a question about the validity of the data contained in the manuscript or the advisability of publishing a scholarly work, the Editorial Board provides the author with an opportunity to answer the questions.

8. The Editorial Office ensures confidentiality and informs the reviewers about the need to maintain confidentiality when they are sent for reviewing. The Editorial Board does not inform anyone about the status of the material in the journal, except the authors.

9. The Editorial Board keeps the personal data of reviewers confidential, not allowing its transfer to third parties.

Ethics of editing academic publications

1. The Editorial Board decides whether to accept or reject publications, aware of the special requirements for the integrity and objectivity of this process and for its consistency with the scholarly vision of the journal.

2. All editorial processes are posted in information materials for authors: requirements for authors, types of materials to be published, and the journal's processing of materials.

3. In order to ensure the accuracy of the published data by making corrections when unquestionable errors are found in the work, an opportunity is provided to make appropriate corrections or correct misprints as soon as possible. The online version of the material is corrected with the date of correction and a link to the printed list of typos. If the error renders the paper or a significant part of it invalid, the paper is withdrawn with an indication of the reason (e.g., good faith error).

4. Upon the conclusion of the review, the Editorial Board takes appropriate action with an appropriate comment explaining the information from the review.

5. The Editorial Office responds to all allegations or suspicions of misconduct regarding the research or publication that come from readers, reviewers, or other editors.

6. Editors provide authors with a list of requirements. The guidelines are subject to regular updates. Editors conduct their work in accordance with an identity assurance system.

7. The editors accept information about the problems identified and decide whether to accept or reject the submitted work for publication.

8. Editorial conflicts of interest should be publicly disclosed. Editors should not make decisions regarding materials for which they have a conflict of interest.