Ethical norms
Guidelines
on publishing ethics and unfair publishing practice of the scientific journal
“Scientific Works of Interregional Academy of Personnel Management. Political Sciences and Public Management”
The Editorial Board and the editorial staff of the scientific journal “Scientific Works of Interregional Academy of Personnel Management. Political Sciences and Public Management” advocate the policy focused on observing the principles of publishing ethics and claim that control over the fulfillment of the principle of publishing (editorial) ethics is one of the key elements of peer-review and publication.
1. Responsibilities of the Chief Editor
1.1. A decision on the article’s publication
The Chief Editor of the scientific journal “Scientific Works of Interregional Academy of Personnel Management. Political Sciences and Public Management” is responsible for deciding on which manuscripts sent to the editors’ office should be published. The decision always shall be based on a paper validation check and its relevance to researchers and readers. The Chief Editor can be guided by the methodological recommendations developed by the Editorial Board and by the following legal requirements: zero tolerance to defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Chief Editor is also free to advise with the members of the Editorial Board and (or) peer reviewers and (or) representatives of the academic staff of PJSC “HEI “Interregional Academy of Personnel Management” when deciding on publication.
1.2. Fair play
The Chief Editor of “Scientific Works of Interregional Academy of Personnel Management. Political Sciences and Public Management” evaluates the manuscripts submitted in terms of their intellectual content regardless of the author’s race, gender, sexual identity, religion and affiliation, ethnic background, citizenship and political beliefs.
1.3. Privacy Policy
The Chief Editor of “Scientific Works of Interregional Academy of Personnel Management. Political Sciences and Public Management” and members of the Editorial Board are not allowed to disclose information about the submitted manuscript, except for the author, peer-reviewers, potential peer-reviewers, advisers of the Editorial Board and a publisher.
1.4. Data disclosure and a conflict of interests
Data represented in the submitted manuscript shall not be used in any contributions of the Chief Editor and members of the Editorial Board without the written consent of the author. Confidential information or ideas, which have been gained during peer-review, shall be kept strictly confidential and shall not be used for self-interest. The Chief Editor shall give up on his participation in peer-review if there is a conflict of interests due to competition, collaboration or other relationship with any of the authors, companies or institutions related to the article. The Chief Editor shall demand from all journal authors to provide information about the relevant adverse interests and publish amendments if a conflict of interests is revealed after the publication. If appropriate, another specific action can be taken: a publication of refutation or expression of concern.
1.5. Examination of ethical complaints
The Chief Editor of “Scientific Works of Interregional Academy of Personnel Management. Political Sciences and Public Management” shall take reasonable quick actions by contacting editors, a publisher or academic staff in case of ethical complaints towards the submitted manuscript or published article.
2. Responsibilities of peer-reviewers
2.1. Involvement in the decision-making process
Peer review helps the Chief Editor decide on the article’s publication, and a connection with the author also can contribute to the improvement of his/her manuscript.
2.2. Proficiency
Every peer reviewer who realizes his incompetence to review a research paper or knows that immediate review is impossible is obliged to inform the Chief Editor and withdraw from the review process.
2.3. Confidentiality
Every manuscript, which is subjected to peer-review, shall be considered as a confidential document. It shall not be discussed with others, except people authorized by the Chief Editor.
2.4. Impartiality standards
Peer reviews shall be impartial. Personal criticism against an author is inadmissible. A peer reviewer shall express his/her opinion clearly and reasonably.
2.5. Source recognition
If the authors didn’t refer to the published paper, a peer reviewer shall mention this fact. Any statement that specific data, conclusion or argument set out in the article has already been published in scientific sources must be accompanied by the relevant reference. The reviewer shall notice the chief editor if there is any significant similarity or crossing between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work he has been already familiar with.
2.6. Data disclosure and a conflict of interests
Unpublished data, which is represented in the submitted manuscript, shall not be used in any contributions of a peer reviewer without the written consent of the author. Confidential information or ideas, which have been gained during peer-review, shall be kept strictly confidential and shall not be used for self-interest. The peer reviewer shall give up on his participation in peer-review if there is a conflict of interests due to competition, collaboration or other relationship with any of the authors, companies or institutions related to the article.
3. Responsibilities of the authors
3.1. Originality and plagiarism
The authors of the article shall guarantee the originality of their manuscript. If the authors have used the work (works) and (or) words of other authors, it must be noted through a reference or mentioned in the text.
Plagiarism takes many forms: from taking credits for one’s paper to copying or paraphrasing significant parts of someone’s work (without reference to sources), and to avouch one’s rights to the results of research conducted by others.
Plagiarism, in all its forms, is unethical conduct and is unacceptable. The simultaneous submitting of the same manuscript to more than one journal is unethical and unacceptable. The author shall not submit an article, which has been already published, for consideration in another journal. The work of other researchers must be properly recognized. Authors shall provide references to all publications that have influenced the content of the relevant manuscript.
3.2. Authorship
Authorship shall be limited to those individuals who have a made a significant contribution to the concept, planning, execution or interpretation of the study being described. All individuals, who have made a significant contribution, shall be mentioned as co-authors. If any person has been involved in any significant part of the project, she/he shall be acknowledged or included in the list of co-authors.
3.3. Information disclosure and a conflict of interests
All authors shall disclose in their work any financial or other big conflict of interest that could be interpreted as an impact on the outcome of the evaluation of their manuscripts. All sources of support for project funding should be disclosed.
3.4. Errors in the published papers
If the author notices a significant error or inaccuracy in his published work, he should immediately inform the Chief Editor of "Scientific Works of Interregional Academy of Personnel Management. Political Sciences and Public Management" and cooperate with the chief editor in order to publish a refutation or amendments to the article. If a third party doesn’t inform the chief editor that there is a significant error in the published paper, the author is obliged to urgently refute or correct the article, or provide the chief editor with evidence of the correctness of the published work.
3.5. Plagiarism detection
The editorial board and the editorial staff of “Scientific Works of Interregional Academy of Personnel Management. Legal Sciences” undertake to assist the scientific community in all aspects of the implementation of publishing ethics policy, especially in cases of assumption of duplication of articles or plagiarism.
