Editorial Ethics

The editorial committee of the journal «Actual Issues of Modern Philology and Gournalism», takes responsibility for support of the scientific reputation, is guided by the principles of scientific character, objectivity, proficiency and impartiality and does everything for providing the quality of scientific publications, taking into consideration the author’s position and author’s rights. The editorial ethics of the journal «Actual issues of modern philology and journalism» is developed considering the Code of conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors – Committee on Publication Ethics, as well as  the Declaration of Association of scientific editors and publishers «The ethical principles of scientific publications». The editorial committee does everything for compliance with the ethical rules adopted by the international scientific society and for preventing the violation of them. The given policy is the necessary condition of successful participation of the journal in the development of complete system of knowledge. The editorial committee is responsible for publication of the author’s writings and in connection with it guarantee the compliance with the editorial ethics. 

Ethics of the authorship of the scientific publications

The author (or the group of authors) acknowledges (acknowledge) the initial responsibility for originality and reliability of the results of the scientific research, which presupposes the compliance with the following principles:

  • The authors of the article must present reliable results of the research conducted. The results which are obviously mistaken or falsified are not accepted.
  • The authors must guarantee that the results of their research presented in the article are completely original. The fragments borrowed from other sources must be accompanied by a reference to the source and its author. In case of using the fragments from other works or quoting the statements of other authors, the appropriate references to the source and its author must be presented in the article. Superfluous borrowings as well as plagiarism in any form, including quotations without references, rephrasing or assignment of rights to the results of other research, are unethical and inappropriate. The originality of the text must be not less than 85 %.
  • It is necessary to admit the contribution of all the people who has influenced the research process this or that way. The references to the works which were important for the research must be presented in the article.
  • The authors must not sent the article which has already been sent to other journal and is being approving as well as the article which has already been published in other journals.
  • All the people who has contributed to the research must be mentioned as co-authors. The people who did not take part in the research cannot be mentioned as co-authors.
  • If the author reveals serious mistakes or inaccuracy in the article in the process of approving or after publishing, he/she must inform the editorial committee as soon as possible. 

Ethics of reviews on scientific publications

The reviewer carries out the scientific examination of the author’s writings under the principle of impartiality which presupposes the following:

  • The manuscript sent for the review must be considered as a private document which cannot be given for acquaintance or discussion to any third person who is not authorized by the editorial committee. The unpublished data got form the manuscripts sent for review cannot be used by the reviewer for personal reasons.
  • The reviewer must give an objective and reasoned estimation to the results of the research. It is inappropriate to criticize the author personally.
  • The reviewer must inform the editorial committee of the journal if any conflict of interests or any other circumstances are revealed which prevents the reviewer from fair and impartial estimation of the article.
  • The reviewer who does not consider himself/herself qualified enough for the estimation of the manuscript or cannot be objective, for example, in case of a conflict of interests with the author or the organization must inform the editor and apply for exception him/her from the process of review.
  • The editorial committee maintains confidentiality of the personal information about the reviewers.