The relevant text of ethics of scientific publications Code in Russian is available on constant address http://www.publicet.org/code
Non-commercial partnership “Committee on ethics of scientific papers”, Russia, Moscow, email@example.com
These instructions correspond to the editorial policy of the journal.
The editorial of the journal “Neophilology” do all the possible to follow the these norms, taken by international scientific society, and to prevent all the transgressions of these norms.
The code of scientific papers’ ethics unites and reveals general principles and rules, which the participants of scientific papers’ process: authors, reviewers, editorial board members, editors and employees of the editorial should follow.
Editorial board support the policy, aimed at following the principles of publishing ethics and recognizes that following the principles of publishing (editorial) ethics is one of main principles of reviewing and publishing of the journal. Editor-in-chief realizes general governing. The decision about publication is taken, following the policy of the journal, basing on scientific reviews and the opinion of editorial board. The works estimation must be based on their content and the quality of scientific results despite the sex, race, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, religion, citizenship or political views of the author. The information about the provided manuscript may be given to the author only, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial board members, publisher.
The consideration of the article supposes that it contains the received by authors new non-trivial scientific results, which were have not been published before.
After receiving the article from the author the editorial gives it for reviewing to a member of journal's editorial board or a specialist in the relevant scientific direction. The reviewer must be acknowledged experts in the themes of the reviewed materials, have publications for the last 3 years on the theme of the reviewed article. The experts have all the possibilities to give motivated critical remarks considering the level and the clarity of presentation, its correspondence to the profile of the journal, relevance and the validity of results. The recommendations of the reviewers are the basis for acceptance of the final decision about the article publication by the editorial board.
The editor and all the employees do not have the right to give the information about the presented articles, except for the corresponding authors, reviewers, other editorial consultants and if necessary publisher.
The editor and employees do not have the right to use non-published materials, used in the presented manuscript, in their own research without the agreement of the author.
In case of the conflict of interests at the result of competitive interaction, cooperation or other relations and connection with one of the author, companies, or establishments, connected with the presented manuscripts, the editor gives the manuscript for consideration to the other member of editorial board.
The editors must ask from all the participants of the process the revealing of the existing competitive interests. If the competitive interests were revealed after the publication of the article, the editorial must provide the publication of modifications.
When ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published article the editor should take reasonably responsive measures in collaboration with the publisher (or society). Every report of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it came years after the publication of the article. If the complaint is supported, the publication of corrections, denials or apologies follows.
Ethic principles in the reviewer’s activity
The manuscript received for reviewing must be considered as confidential document, which cannot be given for acknowledgement or discussion to the third persons, who do not have capability from the editorial.
The reviewer must give objective and reasoned assessment of study results. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used for personal purposes of the reviewer.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through the peer review process should remain confidential and not used for personal gain.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work in peer-reviewed material that was not cited by the authors. Any statements, conclusions or arguments that have been used previously in any publications must be accompanied by relevant citations. The reviewer must pay attention to substantial or partial similarity with any other published paper of which reviewer has direct experience.
The reviewer who has not, in his opinion, qualified to assess the manuscript, or cannot be objective, for example, in the case of a conflict of interest with the author or organization should inform the editor with a request to be excluded from the reviewing process of this manuscript.
The principles which the author (co-authors) of scientific papers must follow
The authors of the articles must provide positive results of the carried out researches. The false or fabricated researches are not allowed.
The authors must guarantee that the results of the research, given in the presented manuscript are absolutely original. The borrowed parts or arguments must be formalized with obligatory reference to the author or the source. Excessive borrowing and plagiarism in any form, including unregistered quotes, paraphrasing or assignment of rights to the results of other people’s research are unethical and unacceptable.
It is necessary to recognize the contribution of all persons somehow influenced the course of the study, in particular, the article must be submitted references to the work that had value in the research.
Authors should not submit the manuscript to the journal, which was sent to another journal and is under consideration, as well as articles already published in another journal.
The co-authors of the article should be all persons who have made a significant contribution to the study. Among the sponsors is unacceptable to designate persons who did not participate in the study. The author should ensure that the names of all contributors and project participants placed on the lists of sponsors and participants, and that all co-authors have reviewed the final version of the paper and approved it and consented to its publication.
If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his published work, he shall immediately notify the editorial office and to assist them in removing or correcting the error. If the editor learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, the author should immediately remove or correct them, or to submit amended proofs of correctness of the original article.