The Scientific journal “Scientific Notes Journal of St. Petersburg State Institute of Psychology and Social Work” (further in the text – journal) tries to follow high standards of publication ethics. The ethics of scientific publications is a system of standards of professional behavior in the relationship of authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, and readers in the process of creation, distribution and use of scientific publications.
The editorial, the editorial Council, the editorial board, reviewers, and the journal publisher follow the ethical standards adopted by the International scientific community and do everything they can to prevent any violations of these standards.
In their activities the editor-in-chief, the editors, the editorial Council, the editorial board, the reviewers, and the journal publisher rely on recommendations and standards developed in the domestic non-profit partnership “Committee on scientific publication ethics”, Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and also take into consideration the valuable experience of reputable international journals and publishing houses including Elsevier.
The principles of ethical behavior presented below are binding on all parties involved in the review and publication process of a scientific article: author(s), reviewers, the editor-in-chief, the editors, the editorial Council, the editorial board of the journal, and the publisher.
Compliance with the rules of ethics of scientific publications by all participants in this process helps ensure the rights of authors to intellectual property, to improve the quality of the publication in the eyes of the world scientific community and to exclude the possibility of unauthorized use of copyright materials in the interests of individuals.
This provision corresponds to the journal’s policy and is one of the main components of reviewing and publishing the journal.
1. Principles of professional ethics in the activities of the editor-in-chief, the editorial, the editorial Council, and the editorial board
In their activities the editor-in-chief, the editorial, members of the editorial Council and the editorial board of the journal are responsible for publication of copyright works, which entails the need to follow the next fundamental principles:
1.1. When making a decision on publication, the editor-in-chief of the journal is guided by the reliability of the data provided and significance of the work in question.
1.2. The editor-in-chief of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal will be accepted for publication and which will be rejected. At the same time he is guided by the journal’s policy and complies with legal restrictions, avoiding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. While making a decision, the editor-in-chief can consult with the members of the editorial board and reviewers.
1.3. The editor-in-chief should not have any conflict of interest with respect to articles that he rejects or accepts.
1.4. The editor-in chief should withdraw himself from reviewing articles (namely: request a deputy editor-in-chief or collaborate with other members of the editorial board when considering the work instead of personally reviewing it and making a decision) if there are conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative or other interactions and relationships with authors, companies, and possibly other organizations associated with the article.
1.5. The editor-in-chief, the editorial staff, and members of the editorial board of the journal should not disclose any information about an article submitted to the journal to anyone other than the author(s), designated and potential reviewers, other editorial staff, and, if necessary, the publisher.
1.6. The unpublished data obtained from submitted articles for reviewing should not be used by the editor-in-chief, the editorial staff or the members of the editorial board for personal purposes or transferred to third parties (without written consent of the author). The information or the ideas obtained in the course of reviewing and related to possible privileges should be kept confidential and not used for the purpose of obtaining benefits.
1.7. The editor-in-chief evaluates articles exclusively by their scientific contents – regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, nationality, citizenship, origin, social status or political views of the authors of the articles.
1.8. The editor-in-chief should not allow information to be published if there is sufficient reason to believe that it is plagiarism.
1.9 The article, if accepted for publication, is placed in the public domain; the copyright is reserved for the authors.
1.10. The editor-in-chief together with the publisher should not leave unanswered the claims concerning the reviewed articles or published materials. If a conflict situation is detected, they should take all the necessary measures to restore the violated rights and if errors are detected, they should facilitate the publication of corrections or refutations.
1.11. The editor-in-chief, the editorial staff, and members of the editorial board of the journal are obliged not to disclose information about the accepted article to all people except for authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other scientific consultants, and the publisher.
1.12. The editor-in-chief, the editorial staff and members of the editorial board of the journal must ensure the confidentiality of names and other information relating to reviewers.
2. Ethical principles in the activity of the reviewer
The reviewer carries out scientific expertise of copyright materials, as a result of which his actions must be unbiased in compliance with the following principles:
2.1. Reviewing helps the editor-in-chief and the editorial board make a decision about publication and through appropriate interaction with authors can also help an author improve the quality of the work. Reviewing is a necessary link in formal scientific communications which is at the heart of the scientific approach.
2.2. A reviewer who does not consider himself an expert in the field of the article’s subject or knows that he will not be able to submit a review of the article in time should notify the editor-in-chief and distance himself from reviewing.
2.3. The author or co-author of the reviewed work as well as supervisors of degree applicants cannot be reviewers.
2.4. Any article received from the editorial board for reviewing is a confidential document. It cannot be discussed with other people, except for those specified by the editor-in-chief.
2.5. A reviewer must be objective. Personal criticism of the author is not allowed. The reviewer must express his opinion clearly and argumentatively.
2.6. If possibly, a reviewer should identify the published articles that are relevant to the reviewed article and are not cited by the author. Any statement in the review that some observation, conclusion or argument from the reviewed article has been found in the literature before, must be accompanied by an accurate bibliographic reference. The reviewer should also draw the editor-in-chief’s attention to significant similarity or partial coincidence of the reviewed article with any other previously published article,
2.7. A reviewer should not use information and ideas from the article submitted to him for reviewing for personal gain, while maintaining the confidentiality of this information and ideas.
2.8. A reviewer should not accept articles for consideration if there is a conflict of interest caused by competition, collaboration or other relationships with any authors or organizations associated with the article.
3. Ethical principles that should guide the author of a scientific publication
Submission of the article to the editorial board implies that it contains new scientific results obtained by the author (team of authors), which have not been published anywhere before.
Authors should be aware that they are personally responsible for the submitted text of the article, which implies compliance with the following principles:
3.1. Authors of an article about original research should provide reliable results of the work done and objective discussion of the significance of the research. The data underlying the work must be presented correctly. The work must contain enough details and bibliographic references for possible reproduction.
3.2. To provide reliable results of the work or research. Known to be false or falsified statements amount to unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
3.3. The editor-in-chief may request the original data of a scientific article from the authors for review, and the authors should be prepared to provide open access to such data, if possible, and in any case should be prepared to keep original materials for a reasonable period of time after their publication.
3.4. To ensure that the results of the research presented in the article are independent and original. In case of using fragments of other authors’ works and/or borrowing statements of other authors, the article must contain appropriate bibliographic references with mandatory indication of the author and the original source, indicating specific pages in the publication. All articles are subject to mandatory verification through an automated check for borrowing. Excessive borrowing as well as plagiarism in any form, including unformed quotes, paraphrasing or assigning rights to the results of other people’s research are unethical and unacceptable actions. The articles that are compilations of materials previously published by other authors without their creative processing and their own authors’ understanding are not accepted for publication by the editorial board.
3.5. To recognize the contribution of all people who in one way or another influenced the course of research or determined the nature of the submitted scientific work. In particular, the article should contain bibliographic references to Russian-language and foreign publications that were important during the research, The information obtained privately through conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties should not be used without the written permission from its source. All sources must be disclosed. Even if written or illustrative materials of a large number of people are used, permission to do so must be received and submitted to the editors.
3.6. To submit to the journal an original article that was not sent to another journal and is not currently under review, as well as an article that was not previously published in another journal. Failure to comply with this principle is regarded as a gross violation of the ethics of publications and gives grounds for removing the article from review. The text of the article must be original, that is, published in the presented form for the first time. If fragments of the article were previously published in another article, the authors must refer to an earlier work and indicate what is the significant difference between the new work and the previous one. Literal copying of your own works and paraphrasing them are unacceptable, they can only be used as a basis for new conclusions.
3.7. Publishing a certain type of articles (for example, translated articles) in more than one journal is, in some cases, an ethical practice if certain rules are observed. Authors and editors of interested journals should agree to a secondary publication that necessarily presents the same data and interpretations as in the first published work.
The bibliography of the primary work should also be presented in the second publication.
3.8. To guarantee the correct composition of the list of co-authors of the work. All people who have made a significant intellectual contribution to its concept, structure, as well as to the conduct or interpretation of the results of the presented work should be listed as co-authors of the article. Other people who participated in some aspects of the work should be thanked. The author must also ensure that all co-authors are familiar with the final version of the article, approve it, and agree with its submission for publication. All authors specified in the article must bear public responsibility for the content of the article. If the article is multidisciplinary work, co-authors may be responsible for their personal contribution, leaving the collective responsibility for the overall result. It is unacceptable among co-authors to specify people who did not participate in the research.
3.9. If the work involves the use of products, procedures or equipment that can be used at any risk, the author should clearly indicate this in the article,
3.10. If the work involves animals or people as research subjects, the authors must make sure that the article indicates that all stages of the research comply with the legislation and regulations of research organizations and are also approved by the relevant ethical committees. The article should clearly indicate that the informed consent has been obtained from all people who have become research subjects. You must always ensure that your rights for privacy are respected.
3.11. If significant errors or inaccuracies are found in the article at the stage of its review or after its publication, immediately notify the editorial board of the journal and make a joint decision to recognize the error and/or correct it as soon as possible. If the editorial board learns from a third party that the published work contains significant errors, the author must immediately remove or correct them or provide the editorial board with evidence of the correctness of the information provided by him.
3.12. To indicate in the article all sources of financing the work, declare possible conflicts of interest that may affect the results of the research, their interpretation, as well as the opinions of the reviewers. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed as early as possible.
4. Principles of professional ethics in the publisher’s activity
In his activity the publisher is responsible for publication of copyright works which entails the need to follow the next principles and procedures:
4.1. Ability to fulfill ethical obligations by the editorial, the editorial Bboard, reviewers and authors in accordance with these requirements.
4.2. To provide support to the editorial board of the journal in dealing with complaints about the ethical aspects of the published materials and help interact with other journals and/or publishers, if this contributes to the performance of the editors’ duties.
4.3. To ensure the confidentiality of any information received from the authors of publications until its publication.
4.4. To realize that the journal’s activity is not a commercial project and does not have the purpose of making a profit.
4.5. To be sure that the potential profit from advertizing does not affect the editorial board’s decision to accept the article for publication.
4.6. To be always ready to publish corrections, clarifications, refutations, and apologies when necessary.
4.7. To provide the editorial board with the possibility to exclude publications containing plagiarism and false data.