Publishing Ethics | Материалы по археологии, истории и этнографии Таврии

Publishing Ethics

The journal’s activities are governed by clause 70 of the Civil Code of Russia (“The Copyright”), the international standards of scholarly publication ethics (publicationethics.org/resources/international-standards) developed by the COPE, and the experience of the world’s leading journals and publishers. The journal’s editor does all necessary to respect ethical provisions as established in the international research community, and to prevent violations of these provisions both in its own activity and in relations with all the participants of the scholarly publication process, including the authors, reviewers, editors, and readers.

Duties of the Editorial Board and Publication Decision

The editor and members of the Editorial Board are responsible for the contents of the Journal, its high academic level, compliance with the theme and implementation of the requirements set by the regulatory instruments and current legislation of the Russian Federation. The editor of the Journal only accept articles which have not been published before and represent original research works or detailed reviews on one of the themes covered by the Journal. The editor and members of the Editorial Board must assess the intellectual contents of manuscripts regardless of authors’ race, origin, gender, nationality, religious or political beliefs.

The Editorial Board takes reasonably responsive measures when ethical or legal complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, including the publication of rectifications, explanations and apologies.

Privacy

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except for the authors, reviewers, other scholarly consultants, and the publisher.

Conflict of Interest

The contents of submitted manuscripts are not to be used in personal research without a written consent of the author. The information or ideas that experts receive while reviewing manuscripts must remain confidential and must not be used in order to obtain personal benefits.

Duties of Authors

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour, are unacceptable, and constitute a ground for rejecting the manuscript.

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. All co-authors must have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors, alongside with financial support data.

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

The manuscript must not have been published previously, in part or in whole, except as a conference abstract. The authors should ensure that the manuscript has not and will not be submitted to any other journal while still under consideration for this journal.

The authors ensure that he does not violate any laws, legal provisions or ethical conditions of the professional community. All images and other copyrighted material must by properly credited in the manuscript.

Authors should disclose in their manuscript all sources of financial support for the research, including employment, and any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor and cooperate with to retract or correct the paper. If the editor learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.

Duties of Reviewers

Peer reviewing helps the Editor to decide whether to accept a publication and through further cooperation with the author it enables the latter to improve the quality of the work. The reviewers must respect the rules of impartial assessment and confidentiality regarding the submitted manuscripts as specified for the Editorial Board.

Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editorial Board and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors or institutions connected to the papers.

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge. This similarity or overlap will be reason to reject the manuscript.