Ethical Obligations of the Coordination and Editorial Boards of the Scientific Publication

  1. The coordination and editorial of the journal are responsible for the scientific level of the publication and for its compliance with standards and requirements applicable to the form of presentation and the contents of information.
  1. Every single scholarly manuscript is thoroughly checked for compliance with formal requirements to each specific type of scientific information (established by the relevant laws and regulations and modified by the coordination board of the scientific publication) and is subject to mandatory review. The editorial board reserves the right to reject the article or return it to the author for finalizing. If the author wishes to have its article published by the Theory and Practice of Social Systems Management, it shall finalize the contents (form) of the article pursuant to comments (recommendations) of the reviewers (editorial board) and submit the finalized article to the editorial board for completion of the review procedure. If the manuscript submitted to the journal is inconsistent with the specialty of the journal or the materials supplied by the author are too poor scientifically, the editorial board may at its own discretion reject this manuscript and waive the review procedure.
  1. The editorial board (reviewers) guarantees prompt and unbiased review of the manuscripts submitted by the scholarly authors and undertakes to provide the appropriate feedback. The editorial board (reviewers) guarantees unbiased review (expert evaluation of scientific value of the contents of the manuscript and compliance of its form with the established requirements) regardless of the race, religious affiliation or nationality of the author or hierarchic status thereof. The editorial board (reviewers) strictly adheres to the principle of fair review of the scientific manuscripts and guarantees its (their) decision to recommend any particular article for printing is made regardless of commercial or any other interests of any individual involved in the review.
  1. The editorial board strongly discourages any falsification of scientific data, plagiarism or any other improper use (borrowing) of the other authors’ ideas in the scientific manuscript and is likewise opposed to the authors who practice submission of the same manuscript to several publications at a time. The editorial board is also opposed to the authors who practice multiple replication of their own publications in their new pieces of copyrighting (there shall be absolutely no self citation). If the author of the article is in violation of anyone’s rights or the generally accepted norms of science ethics or misinforms the academic community on its personal contribution in the research of any scientific problem, the editorial board may not only reject the submitted manuscript but even confiscate the published article as well. The editorial board will notify the author and the CEOs of the institution that maintains labor relationship with the author on any such facts of violation and on its decision to take the appropriate remedial actions. The Theory and Practice of Social Systems Management will also publish the relevant information on its pages.
  1. Members of the editorial board, individuals involved in the independent review process (the reviewers) and technical staff of the Theory and Practice of Social Systems Management do not disclose to the third parties any information that is related to the contents of the scientific manuscript and the findings of its review (professional judgment). Following the positive opinion of the reviewers (independent experts) regarding the printing of the scientific manuscript in the next issue of the publication, the editor-in-chief, based on the opinion of the members of the editorial board, shall make the final decision concerning the publication of the article. The scientific publication shall print the article and upload it to the appropriate online resources (scientometrical database, official Website of the journal, etc.).
  1. Guided by international laws that require to uphold the copyrights, the coordination and editorial boards of the Theory and Practice of Social Systems Management insist on the need to get prior written consent from the founders of the publication by any third parties seeking to reprint any materials or part thereof previously published by the journal. Any author who borrows any scientific data previously printed by the journal (quotes, schemes, tables, opinions, etc.) for the purpose of using the same in any other documents or individual scientific publications is required to provide the links to the original source and formalize it in accordance with applicable norms and regulations.
  1. For the purpose of objective and unbiased review of the scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial board, members of the coordination and editorial boards and the reviewers engaged in the independent review are required to notify on any potential conflict of interests (any personal, financial, political, religious, etc. interests capable of affecting the individual’s opinion). Prevention of unlawful publication shall be the personal duty of each author, editor, reviewer, publisher and organization.

 

Ethic Obligations of the Authors

  1. Author of the scientific manuscript warrants and represents to the editorial board of the Theory and Practice of Social Systems Management that the said manuscript is the product of scientific endeavors of the author(s) and contains no plagiarized pieces or items incorrectly borrowed from scientific publications of any other research workers. In addition, the author of the manuscript warrants and represents that the scientific article it submits to the editorial board of the journal has never been submitted to any other scientific publications and the contents of the said article comprises the result of the author’s endeavors. Contents of the scientific manuscript shall be properly structured, comply with applicable requirements and capable of clearly conveying the author’s (or authors’) ideas on the problem at hand to the scientific community. The author shall present the findings of its own research on high scientific level and guarantee that, if and whenever necessary, its final conclusions and current research findings, same as the very fact of the relevant research, can be confirmed by other scientists (colleagues). Authors shall be fully liable for the contents of their own scientific articles and for the very fact of their publication.

 

  1. Findings of the scientific research presented by the author in the relevant scientific publication shall correspond with (call upon) the opinion of distinguished scholars and contain references to their scientific works. The author shall correctly refer to the works of other scientists and avoid self citation, unless objectively required (e.g., the scientific article submitted by the author is a logical extension of the same author’s prior scientific publication). There shall be no practices of taking someone else’s ideas and findings and passing them off by the author as its own (plagiarism). In the event of detection of any plagiarism, the author of the article shall be fully liable for breaching the copyrights of the relevant individual(s).

3. Co-authors of the article may be represented only by the immediate participants of the relevant scientific research and finalization of the scientific paper. Each co-author shall have a clear understanding about the extent of its contribution to the handling of a scientific problem. Upon submission of its manuscript to the editorial board, the author shall make sure that the list of co-authors comprises only of the individuals who conform to the authorship criterion and shall be liable for the consent of the co-authors to publish the article in question. The author(s) of the scientific manuscript shall notify the editor-in-chief in advance (at the time of submission of the scientific manuscript) on the fact that the information contained in the manuscript may be the cause of a conflict with the outcome capable of affecting the author itself and the members of the editorial board as well. The author(s) of the article shall list the references in strict compliance with applicable regulations (see Examples of the Reference List in Dissertations and the List of Publications Mentioned in the Author’s Abstract / Form 23 // Bulletin of the Higher Attestation Commission of Ukraine. – 2009. – No. 5. – page 26–30) and the requirements to presentation of the contents in the form of References. The author(s) shall also make reference to each and every idea of the other scientists quoted in the publication. The editorial board may reject the manuscript, if the author fails to comply with the abovementioned requirements to formalization of the submitted materials.

Ethic Obligations of the Reviewers

  1. Review is a mandatory process to be carried out by the editorial board with respect to the scientific manuscripts submitted by the authors. The independent (blind) review only applies to the articles that at the time of submission to the editors office were accompanied by the required package of documents. Most of the authors, excluding however doctors of science and the scholars recognixed by the scientific community, shall provide two reviews made by the doctors of science or one review and abstract from the minutes of the meeting of the chair (petition of the scientific institution) regarding the publication of the scientific manuscript. This procedure makes sure that each manuscript is reviewed on the stage of preparation for submission (reviews that the author shall submit together with its manuscript) and on the stage of review of the submitted materials by the editorial board (the editor in chief shall invite independent experts to professional review of the materials provided by the author).

 

  1. The editor in chief shall select the independent expert with due regard for the opinion of the members of the editorial board (the collegiate approval) out of the prominent scientists whose academic degree and ranking or whose contribution to development of the relevant scholarly sector and whose authority in the scientific community is much higher than that of the author of the manuscript submitted for review. The reviewer has no information about the author of the manuscript (the independent expert gets the said manuscript from the executive secretary of the journal without any details regarding the authorship, which means that the reviewer is not aware of the name, academic degree, ranking or place of employment of the author) and is expected to review the submitted materials objectively and in an unbiased manner. The reviewer shall respect the intellectual independence of the author and the scientific findings of the latter.

 

3. Each member of the coordination and editorial boards is a reviewer. The reviewers are selected for each specific article in accordance with the sphere of their scientific interests and prior scholarly experience. The editorial board may decide to engage other experts whose skills and expertise are the most consistent with the idea of the submitted manuscript. If any external reviewers are engaged, the editor in chief shall get their prior consent and brief them on the editorial policy of the journal. Upon completion of the procedure, the reviewer shall submit to the editor in chief its reasonable opinion regarding the scientific value of the manuscript and share its recommendations regarding the printing of the same in the next issue of the journal. The reviewer shall be liable for quality review of the manuscript. If the reviewer suspects any trace of plagiarism in the scientific manuscript or identity to any prior publication, it shall discontinue the review of any such manuscript and notify the editor in chief on its findings. The editor in chief shall then order an additional inspection of the supplied materials and, based on the findings, decide upon the further steps (terminate the review of the manuscript, notifying the author and its supervisors on the detected plagiarism or carry on with the review procedure). The reviewer shall eschew any use or disclosure of the scientific information submitted for review and shall further guarantee that the contents of the manuscript is kept confidential from the individuals who are not officially appointed by the editor in chief to establish the scientific value of the submitted materials. The scientific manuscript is a confidential document covered by the copyrights of the specific individual.