General provisions

The electronic scientific journal The Black Sea region. History, politics, culture” strives to comply with the high standards of publication ethics. The ethics of scientific publications is the system of professional conduct standards in contacts between the authors, reviewers, editors, publishers and readers in the process of creation, propagation and using the scientific publications.

The editorial team, editorial board, reviewers and the publisher of the journal follow the ethical standards, accepted by international scientific community; do their best to prevent breaking these norms.

Activities of the editor in chief, editorial team, editorial board, reviewers and the publisher of the journal are based on recommendation and standards, developed by the Russian noncommercial partnership “Committee on the ethics of scientific publications” (http://publicet.org/), Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and considerations of the valuable experience of authoritative international journals and publishing houses.

The principles of ethical conduct given below are obligatory for all parties involved in the process of examination and publication of scientific articles: the author/authors, reviewers, editor in chief, editorial team, the editorial board and the publisher of the journal.

Following the rules of scientific publications ethics by all participants contributes to protecting intellectual property rights, increasing international reputation of the journal and preventing unlawful use of author’s materials in to the benefit of some persons.

This statement complies with the policy of the journal and is one of main components of reviewing and publication.

 

  1. Standards of professional ethics in the activity of editor in chief, editorial team and editorial board

The editor in chief, editorial team, members of the editorial board of the journal bear responsibility for the promulgation of works of authorship, which leads to the need to comply with the following basic principles:

1.1. When approving the publication the editor in chief of the scientific journal is guided by the authenticity of the data presented and by the scientific significance of the article in question.

1.2. The editor in chief of the journal is responsible for accepting or rejecting  the articles. In doing this they are guided by the policy of journal and observe legal constrains avoiding slander, intellectual property rights violation and plagiarism. When making the decision the editor in chief can consult with the members of editorial board and the reviewers.

1.3. The editor in chief must not have any conflict of interests concerning the articles, which they accept or reject.

1.4.The editor in chief must recuse themselves from the examination of the manuscripts (namely: to ask the deputy editor in chief or to collaborate with other members of the editorial board when examining the manuscript instead of personal review and decision making) in case of conflicts of interests as a result of competitory, cooperative and other interactions and relations with the authors, companies and other organizations related to the manuscript.

1.5. The editor in chief, editorial team and members of the editorial board of the journal must not reveal any information on the submitted manuscript to anyone, except the author/authors, the assigned and potential reviewers, other members of the editorial team and, if necessary, the publisher.

1.6. Unpublished data, obtained from submitted manuscripts must not be used by the editor in chief, editorial team or by members of the editorial board for the personal purposes or be transferred to the third parties (without the written agreement of the author). The information or the ideas, obtained in the course of reviewing and connected with the possible advantages, must remain confidential and not be used for the purpose of personal benefit.

1.7. The editor in chief evaluates the manuscript exclusively according to its scientific content – irrespectively of the race, gender, religion, nationality, citizenship, origin, social position or political views of the authors of the manuscript.

1.8. The editor in chief must not allow publication of information, if there are sufficient reasons to assume it plagiarism.

1.9. Articles are published open access; copyrights remain with the authors.

1.10. The editor in chief and the publisher must not leave without the answer the claims concerning examined manuscripts or published materials. When revealing a conflict situation they must take all necessary measures for restoring the disrupted rights, and when detecting errors they must facilitate publication of corrections or refutations.

1.11. The editor in chief, editorial team and members of the editorial board of the journal must not reveal the information on accepted manuscript to anyone except the authors, reviewers, possible reviewers, other scientific consultants and the publisher.

1.12. The editor in chief, editorial team and members of the editorial board of the journal must keep the names and other information concerning reviewers confidential. If it is necessary, when attracting a new reviewer, the latter can be informed about the names of the previous reviewers.

 

  1. Ethical standards in reviewer’s work

The reviewer conducts a scientific examination of the author’s materials, which implies unbiased character of their actions complying with the following principles:

2.1. Reviewing helps the editor in chief and editorial board to make a decision about the publication and by means of appropriate interaction with the authors it also can help the author to improve the work. Reviewing is a necessary component in formal scientific communications, which makes the basis of scientific approach.

2.2. The reviewer, who does not consider himself specialist in the research area the article deals with or knows that they are not able to provide the review in time must notify the editor in chief and recuse themselves from reviewing.

2.3. Submission can not be reviewed by the author, co-author of the manuscript or by their scientific supervisors or members of the institution the author is affiliated with.

2.4. Any manuscript received from the editorial team for reviewing is a confidential document. It cannot be discussed with anyone except the persons appointed by the editor in chief.

2.5. The reviewer must be unbiased. The personal criticism of the author is not allowed. The reviewer must state their opinion clearly, accurately and in a well-argued manner.

2.6. If possible the reviewer should point out the published articles, relating to the article under consideration and not quoted by the author. Any assertion about the fact that the observation, conclusion or argument from the article being reviewed are encountered in literature must be accompanied by precise bibliographical reference. The reviewer must also draw attention of the editor in chief to significant similarity or overlap of the reviewed article with any other previously published one.

2.7. The reviewer must not use information and ideas from the article for personal benefit, observing confidentiality of this information and ideas.

2.8. The reviewer must not agree to examine the manuscript if there are conflicts of interests caused by competition, collaboration or by other relations with any authors or organizations relating to the article.

 

  1. Ethical standards for authors

Manuscripts submission imply that the findings obtained by the author (coauthors) are new and haven’t been published before.

The authors must be aware, that they are personally responsible for the content of the manuscript, which implies complying with the following principles:

3.1. Contributors of original studies findings must provide reliable results of the accomplished work and objective consideration of the significance of the study. The data making the basis of the work must be error-free. The work must contain sufficient details and bibliographical references for possible reproduction.

3.2. Deliberately false or fraudulent assertions are set equal to unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

3.3. The editor in chief can ask initial data of the article for reviewing and the authors must be ready to grant open access to such data, if this is possible, and in any case must be ready to preserve source materials during the reasonable period of time after their publication.

3.4. Authors must ensure that the findings presented in the manuscript are independent and original work. In case of using fragments of others’ works and/or borrowing assertions of other authors, the article should be supplied with corresponding bibliographical references including indication of the author and the original source. All submissions are subjected to antiplagiarism check (the “Antiplagiat” system). Excessive borrowings as well as any forms of plagiarism (not properly organized quotations, periphrasis or appropriation of rights to the results of others’ studies) are considered unethical and unacceptable. Compilations from materials published by other authors and presented without any creative processing and reinterpretation are not accepted.

3.5. Contribution of all persons influencing the research should be recognized. Bibliography should contain references to Russian and foreign publications valuable for conducting the research. Information obtained in personal conversations, correspondences or discussions with third parties must not be used without written permission from the source.

3.6. Submissions must not be under consideration for publication elsewhere. Failing to follow this rule is considered serious violation of the ethics of publications and gives grounds for removing the article from the reviewing. The text of article must be original, i.e., be published in the given form for the first time. If some elements of the manuscript are part of another article published before, the authors must provide reference to the earlier work and to indicate substantial difference between the new article and the previously published one. Verbatim quotation of the author’s previous works and their periphrasis are unacceptable. They can be used as a basis for new conclusions only.

3.7. Publication of translated articles in more than one journal is considered ethical only under certain conditions. The editorial team of the journal which published the article earlier should agree to the second publication, which should contain the same data and interpretations as in the primarily published work. The bibliography of the primary work must be presented also in the second publication.

3.8. Authors should guarantee the correct list of  co-authors. This list should include all those who made a significant intellectual contribution to the concept, structure, and also to conducting or interpreting the results of the work. Other people participating in the work should be given acknowledgment.  The author must also guarantee, that all co-authors are aware of the final version of the article, approve it and agree with its publication. All authors indicated in the list are personally responsible for the content of article. In case of interdisciplinary articles each author is responsible for their personal contribution while retaining collective responsibility for the general result. Those, who did not participate in the research must not be included into the list of coauthors.

3.9. In case of detecting significant errors or inaccuracy in the article during its examination or after its publication the authors must inform the editorial team without any delay and make a joint decision about the acknowledgement of the error and/or its correction as soon as possible. If a third person informs the editorial team about significant errors in the published article, the author must make a correction without delay or to prove the correctness of the presented information.

3.10. The author must indicate in the manuscripts all sources of funds and to declare the possible conflicts of interests, which can influence the results of investigation, their interpretation, and also the judgments of reviewers. Potential conflicts of interests must be opened as early as possible.

 

  1. Ethical standards for publishers

The publisher is responsible for promulgation of works of authorship, which makes necessary following the next basic principles:

4.1. to contribute to exercising ethical responsibilities by the editorial team, editorial board, reviewers and authors in accordance with the given requirements.

4.2. To support the editorial team in examination of ethical claims to the materials published and to help interact with other journals and/or publishers, if this contributes to exercising the responsibilities of editors.

4.3. To keep confident any information obtained from the authors to the moment of its publication.

4.4. To be aware, that the journal is a non-profit project.

4.5. To be confident, that the potential profit from placing advertisement does not influence the decisions of the editorial team on accepting the article for publication.

4.6. To be always ready to publish corrections, explanations, refutations and apologies, when necessary.

4.7. To give the editorial team the possibility to reject publications containing plagiarism and unreliable data.

 

Statement on ethics of scientific publications is approved by the editor in chief of the journal “The Black Sea region. History, politics, culture” PhD. Professor Galina R. Naumova