кодекс этикироссийский флагBesides depending on compliance with laws and regulations, the future of science in general and the sphere of scientific publications in particular is also in direct correlation with the principles of ethics, governing relationships between the participants of the scientific andpublishing community. The combination of twolays a fertile ground for an increased number of high-quality scientific publications and development of successful cooperation among the authors, publishers and readers thereof.The communal experience of ethical behaviour has beenexpressed in a single document: The Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications (hereinafter referred to as “the Code”) developed by the Scientific Publications Ethics Committee.The Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications combines and interprets the general principles and rules that should govern the relations between the parties — authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, distributors, and readers – cooperating in the process of publication of a scientific work:.Key terms:Ethics of scientific publications is a system of professional conduct standards governing relations between authors, reviewers, editors, publishers and readers in the process of development, distribution and utilisation of scientific publications.
Editor is a representative of a scientific journal or a publishing house, who prepares materials for publication and keeps in contact with authors and readers of scientific publications.
Author is a person or a group of persons (group of authors) involved in creation of a publication containing the results of some scientific research.
Reviewer is an expert acting on behalf of a scientific journal or a publishing house and conducting scientific expertise of author’s materials in order to determine feasibility of their publication.
Publisher is a legal or natural person mediating public release of a scientific publication.
Reader is any person, who familiarised him/herself with the published materials.
Plagiarism is an intentional appropriation of somebody else’s work of science or art, as well as author’s original ideas or inventions. Plagiarism, being a violation of the copyright and patent law, may entail legal liability.
Principles of Professional Ethics in Editor’s and Publisher’sWork
While carrying out his/her activities, it is the editor’s responsibility to makeauthors’ works available to the public, which necessitatesadherence to the following basic principles:
-The decision of the editor of a scientific journal to publish some materials should depend on the reliability of the presented data and significance of the work in question.
— The editor should evaluate only the manuscripts’ intellectual content and should not relate to the author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, nationality, social status or political affiliation in conducting such an evaluation.
— The part of data from the manuscripts submitted for consideration, which was not published, must not be used for personal purposes or passed on to third parties without the written consent of the author. Any information or ideas obtained in the course of editing and related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and should not be used for the purpose of personal gain.
— The editor should restrict publiaction of materials, if there is a substantial reason to believe that they were plagiarised.
— The editor in cooperation with the publisher should ensure that all complaints regarding the manuscripts considered or materials published have been addressed, and in case of a dispute they should take all necessary measures to redress for the violation of rights.
Ethical Principles in Reviewer’s Work
The reviewer performs scientific expertise of authors’ materials, which implies that his/her action must be impartial in nature and involve the following principles:
— Any manuscript received for reviewing should be treated as a confidential document that cannot be transferred for review or discussion to third parties, lacking relevant authorisation of the editorial office.
— The reviewer is obliged to give an unbiased and reasoned assessment of the presented study results. Personal criticism towards any author is unacceptable.
— Unpublished data from the manuscripts submitted for consideration must not be used by the reviewer for personal purposes.
— The reviewer, who believes he/she is not qualified to assess the manuscript or cannot be unbiased, for example, in case of a conflict of interest with the author or organisation, should inform the editor about the situation and request to be excluded from participation in the review of the manuscript.
Principles That Should Guide the Author of Scientific Publications
The author (or group of authors) realises that he/she bears the primary responsibility for the novelty of the scientific research and validity of its results, which involves adhering to the following principles:
— The article authors should provide valid results of the conducted research. It is unacceptable to provide intentionally false or fraudulent statements.
— The authors should ensure that the research results outlined in the submitted manuscript are original in their entirety. Any borrowed fragments or statements must be presented with the obligatory indication of their authors and sources. Excessive borrowing and plagiarism in any form, including unremarked quotes, paraphrasing or any appropriation of rights to the results of other people’s research are unethical and unacceptable.
— It is necessary to recognise the contribution of all persons who in any way influenced the research progress, and the article must be submitted with the references to the works that played an important role in the research.
— The authors should not submit manuscripts that have been already forwarded to another journal and are under consideration at the moment, as well as any articles that have been published in another journal.
— The list of co-authors of an article should include all persons who have made significant contributions to the research. It is unacceptable to put the names of persons, who did not participate in the research, on the list of co-authors.
— If the author finds any significant errors or inaccuracies in the article at the stage of its review or after its publication, he/she must notify the editor about that as soon as possible.