Publication Ethics

Politics of the journal "Modern Historical and Political Issues" in the sphere of publication ethics is based on standards and recommendations of the Ethics Committee publications (The Committee on Publication Ethics - COPE, Great Britain), which, since 1997, have gained international publicity and importance. We, editors, publishers and authors, in the process of creation, distribution and usage of scientific publications are guided by the system of generally accepted norms of professional behavior in the relationships of authors, reviewers, editors, publishers and readers. Moreover, in this relationship, we proceed from the principles of integrity, trust between stakeholders and participation in public debate, if necessary.

Guidelines for the articles publication.

1.1. Following the publishing ethics by the editorial board.

1.2. Following the guidelines when rejecting articles, taking into account the rights of the author.

1.3. Supporting the integrity of academic writing.

1.4. Prevention of damage to intellectual and ethical standards in the presence of commercial interests.

1.5. Willingness to publish corrections, clarifications, rejections and apologies, if necessary.

1.6. Prevention of the publication of plagiarism and fraudulent data.

2. Ethical obligations of the editorial board.

2.1. Decision on publication. The editor of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. Checking the work for the relevance of the topic and its significance for researchers and readers should always be the main factors influencing the decision to publish an article. At the same time, the editor's decision should be based on the provision of the law, prohibiting copyright infringement and plagiarism, as well as be guided by the policy of the journal's editorial board. The editor consults with other members of the editorial board on the compliance of certain author's materials with the requirements.  

2.2. Principles of fair game. The editor and the editorial board evaluate the manuscripts according to their intellectual content, regardless of race, gender, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship or political views of the author.

2.3. Confidentiality. The editor and all editorial staff are not allowed to disclose information about the submitted works to anyone except the author / authors, the reviewer, other editorial consultants and, if necessary, the publisher.

2.4. Disclosure and conflict of interest.

Unpublished materials disclosed in the submitted paper should not be used in any research by the editor, reviewers or any other informed person without the written consent of the authors. Confidential information or ideas obtained during the review should remain confidential and not be used for personal benefit. The editor must resign (entrust the deputy editor or another member of the editorial board to review the manuscript instead) to review the manuscript, in connection with which he has a conflict of interest as a result of competition, cooperation or other relations with one of the authors. The editor requires all participants in the process to disclose relevant competing interests and publish amendments if a conflict of interest will be identified after the publication. If necessary, other appropriate measures should be taken, such as the publication of a disproof or apology. 

 

3. Principles of professional ethics in the activities of the editor.

3.1. The editor in his activity is guided by the following:

- decides on the publication of materials based on the following criteria: compliance of the manuscript with the subject of the journal; relevance, novelty and scientific significance of the presented article; clarity of presentation; reliability of results and relevance of conclusions. Thus, the quality of the study and its relevance is the basis for the decision to publish;

- takes all possible measures to ensure the high quality of published materials and protect the confidentiality of personal information;

- takes into account the recommendations of reviewers when making the final decision on the publication of the article or other submitted materials;

- explains his decision / decision of the editorial board in case of acceptance or rejection of the article;

- gives the author of the peer-reviewed material the opportunity to justify his research position;

- stands by the freedom of expression, which, however, should not contradict humanistic approaches and principles;

- excludes the influence of business or policy interests on decisions on the publication of materials.

3.2. The editor does not allow to publish materials if there are sufficient reasons to believe that they are plagiarism.

3.3. The editor, together with the publisher, should not leave unanswered claims regarding the considered manuscripts or published materials, as well as take all necessary measures to restore the violated rights in the case of a conflict situation.

3.4. Neither the editors nor the editorial board are responsible for the opinions, views and content of the published manuscripts in the journal. Originality, proofreading of manuscripts and mistakes are the sole responsibility of individual authors.

 

Expert review is a mandatory step in making editorial decisions and, if necessary, in improving the article through editorial messages with the author.

4. Ethical principles, which the author (team of authors) of a scientific publication must be guided by.

Authors (or teams of authors) when submitting materials to the journal, realizing that they bear the primary and personal responsibility for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research, are following the next: 

4.1. The author (s) of the scientific article or any other material must provide reliable research results. Obviously erroneous, falsified or compiled materials are unacceptable.

4.2. The author (s) guarantee that the results of the research presented in the provided manuscript are completely original. Borrowed fragments or statements must be made with the obligatory indication of the author and the original source. Excessive borrowings, as well as plagiarism in any form, including unquoted citations, paraphrasing or appropriation of rights of the results of other people's research, are unethical and unacceptable. Presence of borrowings without a link will be considered by the editorial board as plagiarism. Giving relevant facts, fabrication and falsification of data are not allowed.

4.3. The author/authors should ideally master the skills of academic writing, i.e. the rhetoric and composition of writing scientific articles, presenting their own opinions and arguments, as far as possible, in the most accurate and clear textual form.

4.4. The author (s) must provide only reliable facts and information in the manuscript; provide sufficient information to verify and replicate experiments by other researchers, and do not use information obtained privately without open written permission.

4.5. Avoid duplication of publications (in the cover letter, the author must indicate that the work is published for the first time). If individual elements of the manuscript have been previously published, the author is obliged to refer to an earlier work, emphasizing the differences between the new work and the previous one.

4.6. The author (s) must not submit a manuscript that has been submitted to another journal and is under consideration, as well as an article already published in another journal. 

4.7. It is necessary to recognize the contribution of all persons who in any way influenced the course of the study, in particular, the article should provide references to the works that were relevant to the study.

4.8. The author (s) must follow ethical standards when criticizing or commenting on third-party research.

4.9. The co-authors of the article should indicate all persons who have made a significant contribution to the study.

4.10. The author / authors must show respect for the work of the editorial board and reviewers and eliminate the indicated shortcomings or justify their own author's position.

4.11. The author / authors must submit and draw up the manuscript in accordance with the rules adopted in the journal.

 

5. Ethical principles in the activities of the reviewer.

Reviewing is a mandatory step in editorial decision-making and, if necessary, in improving the article through editorial communication with the author. The reviewer carries out a scientific expertise of the author's materials, as a result of which his actions must be impartial, which is to comply the following principles:

5.1. The manuscript received for the review should be considered as a confidential document that cannot be passed on for review or discussion to third parties.

5.2. The reviewer assumes that the manuscripts are the intellectual property of the authors and belong to the information that is not the subject to disclosure. Violation of confidentiality is possible only if the reviewer declares the inaccuracy or falsification of the materials in the article.

5.3. The reviewer draws the editorial board's attention to the substantial or partial similarity of the evaluated manuscript with any other work, as well as the fact that there are no references to certain points, conclusions or arguments previously published in other works by this or other authors. The reviewer should indicate the relevant published works, which are not cited in the article.

5.4. The reviewer is obliged to give an objective and impartial assessment of the presented results of the study and make decisions based on specific facts, arguing their own position on the reviewed materials. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.

5.5. The reviewer's remarks and wishes should be objective and principled, aimed at raising the scientific level of the manuscript.

5.6. Reviewers do not have the right to use in their own interests the knowledge of the content of the work before its publication.

5.7. Reviewer who, in his opinion, does not have sufficient qualifications to evaluate the manuscript, or cannot be objective, for example, in case of conflict of interest with the author or organization, should inform the editors with a request to exclude him from the review process.

5.8.Reviewers' decisions are the only tool for publication in the journal and will be final.

 

6. Principles of professional ethics in the activities of the publisher.

In its activities, the publisher is responsible for the publication of author's works, which makes necessary the following basic principles and procedures:

6.1. Support the editorial board of the journal in dealing with claims to the ethical aspects of published materials and help interact with other journals or publishers if it can assist in the performance of editors' duties.

6.2. Ensure the confidentiality of the publication received from the authors and any information until its publication.

6.3. Always be prepared to publish corrections, clarifications, disproof and apologies when necessary.

6.4. Give the editors of the journal the opportunity to exclude publications that contain plagiarism and inaccurate data.

6.5. The article, in case of acceptance for publication, is placed in open access; copyright is retained by the authors.

6.6. Post information about the financial support of the study, if the author adds such information to the article.

6.7. Agree with the author the proofreading of the publisher included in the article.

6.8. Do not delay the issue of the journal.

 

7. Violation preventors

7.1. In the situation that may arise in connection with a violation of publishing ethics by an editor, author or reviewer, a mandatory investigation is required. This covers both published and unpublished materials in the journal. The editorial board will demand explanations, without involving persons who may have a conflict of interest with one of the parties. 

7.2. If materials containing significant inaccuracies had been published, it should be corrected immediately in a form accessible to readers and indexing systems.