Publications ethics

Publishing ethics and prevention of unfair publication practices

The editorial staff and editorial board of journal "Herald of Ryazan State Agrotechnological University Named after P.A. Kostychev" follows the norms adopted in the international scientific community, relying on the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics – COPE, not inconsistent with the norms of Russian legislation in the field of regulation of the activities of the media and copyright.

Duties of the Editorial Staff:

The editorial staff is responsible for the content of the journal and the quality of the published articles.

Editors retain objectivity for all submitted articles, making a decision to publish or refuse an article on the basis of the following criteria:

- professional level and relevance of the article;

- correspondence of the article topic to the thematic focus of the journal.

Editors use procedures encouraging accuracy, completeness and clarity of research, including technical editing.

Articles are reviewed according to the scheme of blind review (the reviewer and the author of the article do not have information about each other). Editors are required to maintain the anonymity of reviewers and authors in this process. In cooperation with the editorial board, the editors respond to possible authors 'appeals against reviewers' comments and other complaints.

The responsibility for the decision to publish is entirely on the editorial board of the journal. Articles are published in the journal in order of priority. The decision to publish the article is based on a review. The editorial staff has the right to forward any article to additional review.

The editorial board is always ready to publish corrections, explanations, refutations (withdraw articles) and apologies when it is necessary.

The editorial board has the right to refuse publication of the article at any stage in case of violations of the established rules for submission and processing of the article. In case of refusal to publish an article, the editorial board sends a reasoned refusal to the author.

Duties of the Editorial Board:

The Editorial Board makes efforts to improve the professional and formal quality of the journal, supports freedom of speech and guarantees compliance with the rules of publishing ethics.

The Editorial Board establishes and modifies the rules for articles design and presentation, the order and form of the review.

Duties of Reviewers:

Reviewers provide some reasoned criticisms about the relevance of the topic, its relevance to the journal's profile, the novelty and reliability of the results, the level and clarity of the material presentation and submit their opinion in a review in the form approved by the journal's editorial board.

The reviewer should be objective in evaluating the articles. The expert review helps the editorial board to decide whether to publish the submitted materials, and is also to help the author improve his work through constructive cooperation with the editors.

The reviewer should not abuse the information specified in the article in question for personal or other benefit. Closed information or ideas received during the review should remain confidential.

The reviewer, who believes that his qualification is insufficient to consider the article or he will not be able to review it on time, must notify the editorial staff and refuse the review process. The reviewer may reject the task of evaluating the article for the following reasons of competing professional interests:

- professional or personal benefit from the acceptance or refusal of the article;

- fundamental differences in opinion on the topic of the article;

- close professional or personal relations with the author or any member of the team of authors.

The criticism of the author's personality is excluded.

Duties of Authors:

Authors should present only original works. Authors should indicate that their work is published for the first time and the data in the article are genuine and true. If the elements of the manuscript were previously published in another article, the authors are obliged to refer to an earlier work and indicate what significant difference the new article has. Verbatim copying of one's own works and their paraphrasing is unacceptable; they can be used only as a basis for some new conclusions.

Simultaneous submitting of an article to more than one journal is regarded as unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

Authors should provide materials containing significant contribution to scientific research, reliable and clearly stated results of the work done. Deliberately misleading and falsified information is unacceptable.

The adopted passages of the article should be formatted as quotations and contain bibliographic references specifying the author and the source.

Authors should disclose in their works information about any financial and other significant conflicts of interest, which can affect the results of the study and their interpretation. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed and indicated in the manuscript.

Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contribution to the concept, implementation or interpretation of the research. Authors should ensure that the names of all co-authors and contributors of the project who made some significant contribution to the study are on the list of co-authors and participants, that all co-authors got acquainted with the final version of the scientific work and agreed to publish it.

By submitting the article to the editorial board, the authors confirm their commitment to participate in the introduction of fundamental changes, corrections, elimination of errors in the terms established by the editorial staff at all stages of the preparation of the article for publication. If the editorial staff finds out from a third party that the published work contains significant errors, the author is obliged to remove or correct them immediately or to provide the editors with some proof of the correctness of the original article. Every message about the fact of unethical behavior is considered without fixing the limitation periods.