All parts involved in the process of preparing papers for publication in the peer-reviewed online scientific journal “Vestnik of ASAU” (i.e. authors, reviewers, members of the editorial board) should follow the standards of publication ethics described below.
The ethics statements for the journal are based on the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Responsibilities of Editors:
The editorial board has the right to accept the manuscript for the publication or reject it.
All incoming manuscripts are peer reviewed. However, the manuscript may be rejected, before the peer review process (for example, in cases where the topic of the article does not correspond to the topic of the journal, the article was previously published, etc.)
The editorial board should guarantee the high quality of the materials published in the journal and their content integrity. Also, the editors should always be willing to publish corrections, explanations, apologies when needed.
The editorial board should not have a conflict of interest with the authors of the rejected or accepted articles.
Responsibilities of Reviewer:
The editorial board adheres to the principle of single-blind peer review, which means the reviewers know the identity of authors, but authors do not know the identity of reviewers.
Reviewing should be carried out on the basis of an objective assessment of the manuscript, providing arguments for each comment.
Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments and references as necessary and not be defamatory or libellous. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
Reviewers should declare any competing interests. In the event of a conflict of interest, impossibility to conduct a review on time, lack of proper awareness of the topic of the manuscript, the reviewer is obliged to notify the editorial board in advance.
Reviewers should respect the confidentiality of material supplied to them and may not discuss unpublished manuscripts with colleagues or use the information in their own work.
Editors should consider retracting a publication if:
They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error), or as a result of fabrication (eg, of data) or falsification (eg, image manipulation) ;
It constitutes plagiarism;
The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (ie, cases of redundant publication) ;
It contains material or data without authorisation for use;
Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (eg, libel, privacy);
It reports unethical research;
It has been published solely on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer review process;
Notices of retraction should:
Be clearly identified as a retraction (ie, distinct from other types of correction or comment);
Be published promptly to minimise harmful effects;
Be freely available to all readers;
State who is retracting the article and the reason(s) for retraction;
Be objective, factual and avoid inflammatory language.