The Editorial Board of the Bulletin of Ryazan State University named for S. A. Yesenin adhere to the international principles of publication ethics which are listed in the Code of Ethics in Academic Research developed with due regard to the recommendations issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Declaration of the Association of Science Editors and Publishers. The Editorial Board of the Bulletin of Ryazan State University named for S. A. Yesenin are guided by the principles of validity, reliability, professionalism and impartiality.
Ethical Guidelines for editors
Since editors take responsibility for everything they publish, they are to adhere to the following principles:
When making publishing decisions, editors should be guided by the principles of validity, responsibility, and academic merit of the submitted manuscript.
When assessing the intellectual content of manuscripts, editors should be free from biased decisions based on authors’ race, gender, sexual identity, religious or political views, origin, citizenship, social status.
Editors should never disclose any portion of submitted manuscripts prior to publication or use manuscripts for their own personal profit without obtaining a prior authorization.
Editors should never publish manuscripts they believe can contain plagiarized materials.
Plagiarism is a wrongful appropriation of another author’s work of art or science, another author’s ideas or inventions. Plagiarism constitutes copyright infringement and patent law infringement and may entail legal liability.
The Editorial Board of the Bulletin of Ryazan State University named for S. A. Yesenin bans from publishing articles containing plagiarism in the following forms:
Self-plagiarism. If any portion of a submitted manuscript has been previously published in the Bulletin of Ryazan State University named for S. A. Yesenin or elsewhere, the author is required to cite the previously published work. Authors are expected to reformulate their previous works and indicate how their submitted manuscript offers novel contributions.
Word-for-word plagiarism of another researcher’s work without acknowledging that researcher’s authorship, without citing the source, without enclosing the copied portion in quotation marks.
Incorrect paraphrasing of another researcher’s work, which consists in reformulating one or several sentences of a paragraph or text or in using original sentences in a slightly different order without citing the source. Extensive use of incorrect paraphrasing without citing the source is deemed equivalent to word-for-word plagiarism.
Usurping portions of another researcher’s work without acknowledging that researcher’s authorship, for example a passage, a figure, or a table without citing the source and without enclosing the copied portion of the original in quotation marks.
Editorial decisions are taken within time limits stipulated in the Editorial Review section.
Ethical Guidelines for peer reviewers
All manuscripts submitted to the journal are subject to mandatory peer review conducted by independent experts.
Since peer reviewers are responsible for academic expertise of submitted manuscripts, they should be free from any biased opinions and should adhere to the following principles:
- only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner
- respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review during or after the peer-review process beyond those who are authorized by the journal
- never use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others
- be objective and constructive in their reviews refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libelous or derogatory personal comments
- assess submitted manuscripts in an unbiased and fair manner, otherwise abstain from reviewing them
- never disclose any details of a manuscript or its review
- notify the editorial staff of any conditions that may prevent a timely review
- immediately notify the editorial staff if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the submitted work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and another document
- never intentionally prolong the review process by delaying the submission of a review or by requesting unnecessary additional information from journal or author
- ensure that the assessment of the reviewed manuscript rests on the merits of the work and is not influenced by personal, financial or other considerations or intellectual biases
- never contact authors without prior permission of the journal
- be objective and constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will enable authors to improve their manuscripts
- never make derogatory personal comments or unfounded accusations
- be specific in their criticism and provide evidence with appropriate references to substantiate their general statements
- never suggest that authors should include citations to the reviewer’s (or their associates’) works merely to increase the reviewer’s (or their associates’) citation count or to enhance the visibility of their works
Ethical Guidelines for authors
An author (co-author) is a person who has made a considerable contribution to the submitted manuscript, in terms of research strategy development, data acquisition, data analysis and interpretation.
Authors should take collective responsibility for their work and for the content of their publications.
Authors should check their publications carefully at all stages to ensure that methods and findings are reported accurately.
Publications should contain no less than 80% of new material.
Authors should carefully check all calculations, data presentations, typescripts, submissions, and proofs.
Authors should immediately inform the editor if they discover an error in a submitted, accepted, or published work.
Authors should cooperate with editors in issuing corrections and retractions when required.
Authors should represent the work of others accurately in citations and quotations.
Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the author’s own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary work should be cited where possible.
Original wording taken directly from other researchers’ publications should appear in quotation marks and with the appropriate citations.
Authors should avoid excessive self-citation, gift citation, and irrelevant citation aimed at enhancing the visibility of cited works.
Researchers should ensure that only those individuals who meet authorship criteria (i.e. have made a substantial contribution to the work) are rewarded with authorship and that deserving authors are not omitted.
Any changes to the author list should be approved by all authors including authors who have been removed from the list.
Authors should cooperate with the editor and publisher to correct their work promptly if errors or omissions are discovered after publication.
Authors should adhere to publication requirements that submitted work cannot be submitted to multiple journals simultaneously.
Authors should inform the editor if they withdraw their work from review or choose not to respond to reviewer comments after receiving a tentative acceptance.
Authors should respond to reviewers’ questions in a professional and timely manner.
Funding sources and relevant conflicts of interest should be disclosed.