Scientific periodical

ISSN 2658-5332

  • Home
  • Publishing Ethics

Publishing Ethics

Editorial Office, Editorial Board and Publisher of the Financial Journal are guided by generally accepted international standards for the ethics of scientific publications developed and approved by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and make every effort to fully comply with them.

Duties of Editors

Publication decision
The Editor in Chief of the Financial Journal is responsible for making decisions on the publication, based on the reliability of the data submitted and the scientific significance of the work, as well as on existing legal norms. While making a decision to publish an article, the Editor in Chief takes into account the opinion of reviewers and members of the Editorial Board.

The Editor in chief (editor) estimates manuscripts only on the basis of their scientific contents. The racial and national identity, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, nationality or a political position of the author(s) in no way affect the decision to publish.

The editor does not disclose the names of the manuscript authors submitted for publication to none other than the members of the Editorial Board, but the contents of the manuscript - to none other than the members of the Editorial Board and the reviewers. A use of unpublished materials, which are contained in the manuscript submitted to the publication, is not allowed without the written consent of the authors.

Prevention of the conflict of interest
If there is a conflict of interest, the editor and other members of the Editorial Board should not participate in the process of reviewing the manuscript. The Editorial Office requests experts to write a review containing a report on a conflict of interest. In this case, another reviewer is selected.

Duties of Reviewers

Reviewer’s contribution to decision making process
The reviewer helps the Editor in Chief to make a decision on the publication of the article, and the author (through the interaction of the reviewer with the editor) – improves the content of his research.

Any manuscript received for review is considered by the reviewer to be a confidential document that is not transferable to anyone and is not discussed with anyone other than the editor. The reviewer does not have the right to use unpublished materials contained in the manuscript submitted to him for a review.

Standards of objectivity and conflict of interest
Reviewers should consider the manuscript objectively, and their position should be expressed clearly and reasonably. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewers are required to notify the editor of a conflict of interest due to competing relationships or cooperation.

Exclusion of plagiarism
The reviewer should pay the editor's attention to any case of substantial similarity or coincidence of the peer-reviewed manuscript with any published work, of which he knows. If there are no references to studies in the manuscript, the results of which are closely related to its content, the reviewer should point this out in the review.

Duties of Authors

Authorship questions
The authors of the article can only be persons who have made a significant contribution to the concept, development, implementation or interpretation of the presented research. All persons, who have made a significant contribution, must be listed as co-authors of the article. The author submitting the article to the Editorial Board guarantees that the article lists all the co-authors who meet these criteria, and that all co-authors approved the final version of the article and agreed to submit it to the publication.

Originality of work and plagiarism
Authors should ensure that the article written by them is independent (original), and in case of using other people's works and / or utterances, they should reflect this in the form of appropriate references and citations.

Material submission standards
The article should contain all necessary information and all references, so that others can repeat the research done. False or incorrect statements are unethical conduct and are unacceptable.

Access to data and its retention
Authors may be asked to provide baseline data when reviewing an article by the editors, and they should be prepared to provide public access to these data and must retain it within a year since the publication date.

Disclosure of information and conflict of interest
All authors should indicate in manuscripts any conflict of interest, which could basically affect the interpretation of the work results. All sources of financial support for the research project should be disclosed.

Concurrent and multiple publication
Submitting the same manuscript to several journals simultaneously is considered as unethical and unacceptable. When sending an already published article to another publication, the author is obliged to obtain consent to a secondary publication from the Editorial Office of the magazine, in which the article was published for the first time. The reference to the primary work must be in the secondary publication.

Actions taken in cases of violation of publication ethics

Identification of unethical behavior
Unethical behavior includes cases of violation (by the editor, reviewer, author) of the rules given in the text of publication ethics. Unethical behavior can be detected and communicated to the Editor-in-Chief or Publisher by any person at any time. In order for an investigation of the violation to be initiated, the one who informs the Editor or the Publisher of a violation of ethics must provide sufficient information and evidence. Each application is considered in a uniform manner, and for each final decision or conclusion is made.

The initial decision to conduct an investigation is made by the Editor-in-Chief, who may, if necessary, resort to a consultation with the Publisher. During the investigation, all necessary data should be collected, but information should not be distributed outside the circle of those involved in the investigation. Minor violations can be considered without involving a wider range of individuals. In any case, the editor, reviewer or author should be given the opportunity to respond to any suspicions or allegations. Serious violations may require the employer to be notified of the person charged with ethics violations. The editor-in-chief, through independent study of the available data or through additional consultations with a limited circle of experts, resorting to the help of the Publisher if necessary, should decide on the advisability of informing the employer and / or the head of the professional organization of the reviewer or author.

Sanctions of the Editor-in-Chief in relation to persons who committed facts of unethical behavior

  1. Informing the author or reviewer about misunderstanding or non-compliance with ethical standards.
  2. A letter to the reviewer or author about the fact of violation of ethical standards and possible sanctions.
  3. The imposition of an official ban on the publication of the author's works or on the use of the services of a reviewer for a certain period.
  4. Official publication on the website of the Financial Journal about the revealed facts of unethical behavior.
  5. An official letter to the head of the organization in which the reviewer or author works, or to the head of the organization that finances their research activities.
  6. An official letter to the head of the professional organization in which the reviewer or author is a member.
  7. An official recall of an article from a journal, along with informing readers, representatives of international bibliographic services indexing the journal and the head of the organization in which the author works, as well as the head of a professional organization, if the author is one.

Scientific periodical

ISSN 2658-5332