Review procedure

 

Ethics of Publications

The editorial board of the collection of scientific works "Bulletin of the Criminological Association of Ukraine" is guided in its activities by the publishing principles of the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK), best practice approaches of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for journal editors.

 

1. Principles of professional ethics in the activities of the editor and publisher

1.1. In his activity, the editor is responsible for the publication of author's works, which imposes the necessity of following the following fundamental principles:

- when making a decision on publication, the editor of a scientific journal is guided by the reliability of data presentation and the scientific significance of the considered work;

- the editor must evaluate the intellectual content of the manuscripts regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, citizenship, social status or political preferences of the authors;

- unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for review should not be used for personal purposes or transferred to third parties without the author's written consent. Information or ideas obtained during editing and related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain;

- the editor should not allow information to be published if there are sufficient grounds to believe that it is plagiarized;

- the editor, together with the publisher, must not leave unanswered the claims concerning the considered manuscripts or published materials, and, in the event of a conflict situation, take all necessary measures to restore the violated rights.

2. Ethical principles in reviewer activity

2.1. The reviewer carries out a scientific examination of the author's materials, as a result of which his actions must be impartial in accordance with the following principles: - the manuscript should be considered as a confidential document, which cannot be transferred for review or discussion to third parties who do not have the authority to do so from the editorial office; - the reviewer is obliged to give an objective and reasoned assessment of the presented research results. Personal criticism of the author is not acceptable; – unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for review should not be used by the reviewer for personal purposes; - a reviewer who, in his opinion, does not have sufficient qualifications to evaluate the manuscript, or cannot be objective, for example, in the case of a conflict of interest with the author or organization, must inform the editorial office about this with a request to exclude him from the process of reviewing this manuscript.

2.2. Rules of the review procedure:

2.2.1. Internal and external (persons who are not members of the editorial board or Scientific Council of the journal) reviewers are involved in the review of scientific articles.

2.2.2. At least two independent reviewers (persons who are not part of the scientific unit affiliated with the author of the scientific publication) are appointed for each scientific article.

2.2.3. Reviewers are required to sign a statement stating that there is no conflict of interest (the conflict of interest between the reviewer and the author occurs due to their family or professional relationships, or professional cooperation within two years prior to the preparation of the review).

2.2.4. The reviewer prepares a written response with a conclusion on the possibility of admitting a scientific article to publication.

2.2.5. Double anonymous review is practiced. Information about the authors and reviewers is not distributed to the parties during the review.

3. Principles by which the author of scientific publications should be guided

3.1. The authors are aware that they bear the primary responsibility for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research, which involves compliance with the following principles: - the authors of the article must provide reliable results of the conducted research. Knowingly false or falsified claims are not acceptable; - authors must guarantee that the research results presented in the submitted manuscript are completely original. Borrowed fragments or statements must be issued with a mandatory indication of the author and the original source. Excessive borrowing, as well as plagiarism in any form, including informal quotations, paraphrasing or assigning rights to the results of other people's research, is unethical and unacceptable; - it is necessary to acknowledge the contribution of all persons who influenced the course of the research, in particular, the article should include references to works that were important in conducting the research; - authors should not submit to the journal a manuscript that was sent to another journal and is under consideration, as well as an article already published in another journal; - the co-authors of the article must include all persons who made a significant contribution to the research. Among co-authors, it is inadmissible to indicate persons who did not participate in the research; - if the author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the article at the stage of its review or after its publication, he must notify the editors of the journal as soon as possible.