Publication Ethics

The statements on publication ethics of the Collection «Theoretical and didactic philology» are developed in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and based on the following documents:

According to these documents, the editorial board of the Collection “Theoretical and didactic philology” subscribes to the ethical guidelines, compliance with which is mandatory for all sides involved in the process of publishing of research materials (editors, authors, reviewers, and publishers).

Editors are directly responsible for prevention of publication malpractice. All articles that fail to meet the below standards, i.e., if some kind of malpractice or unethical behavior are discovered at any stage (even after the publication), will be immediately removed from publication.

  1. Editorial board

Editors have the following general responsibilities:

  • Editor is bound to consider all materials of the manuscript submitted by author. The final responsibility for accepting or rejecting the manuscript (based on its relevance, integrity, and fitting into the Collection profile) rests with Editor;
  • Editor should treat author respectfully, regardless of their sex, racial affiliation, and other subjective qualities;
  • Editor is obligated to observe the intellectual property rights of authors by keeping in confidentiality all data provided in the manuscript without using them for personal purposes or transferring to the third parties;
  • Editor should exclude from publishing all plagiarized or falsified materials, as well as in case of redundancy and false attribution of authorship;
  • Editor ensures confidentiality and anonymity of the review process;
  • Editor should invite only highly professional specialists as reviewers.
  1. Authors

Author is a person who has made a worthy contribution to the process of research or interpretation of its results. Author submitting their manuscript for the purpose of publishing and distribution in the scientific community should strive to comply with the following rules:

  • Authors should rely upon exceptionally accurate and actual data, as well as their unbiased interpretation without permitting any false or fraudulent claims about the obtained results;
  • Authors are not allowed to submit the same manuscript to any other journal for publication, in whole or in part. In addition, they should not participate in multiple and redundant publications, which is regarded as self-plagiarism;
  • All research funders, as well as other sources of support, should be clearly identified and listed in the manuscript, including indication of the role of each contributing party;
  • Graphic or textual data from the works published by other authors should be indicated with reference to the source, from which they were taken. Besides, all works published elsewhere and covering similar issues, which influenced the research, should be given in the list of references;
  • If authors discover significant errors and incorrect conclusions in their manuscripts, either accepted for publishing or already published by the Collection they should immediately inform editor about it in order to take appropriate steps, such as correction, disclamation, or retraction;
  • As editorial board makes the final decision to publish the manuscript, authors retain their copyright without restrictions and agree with the transfer of the right to publish and distribute their published work (in print and electronic versions), as well as with that the bibliographic data will be included in the science citation databases and the full text will be freely available at the Collection’s website.
  1. Reviewers

Reviewing of the submitted manuscript should be based on the following major principles:

  • Reviewer maintains confidentiality concerning the scientific inquiry of the manuscript, which is intended to improve its quality and helps the editorial board to finalize their decision on publishing the results of research;
  • Author/co-author of the manuscript cannot act as reviewer;
  • If reviewer recognizes that either the manuscript is not related to his/her scholarly background or the time allocated for review is not enough, he/she immediately sets the ground for refusal;
  • When reviewing the material submitted for publication, reviewers are obligated to be objective in their evaluation of the manuscript. All suggestions and judgments should be based on the relevance, integrity, and originality of the results of research performed by author. Any critical statements of a subjective nature arising from personal attitudes to author or other reasons are not acceptable;
  • Reviewers should disclose all conflicts of interest that may arise;
  • Reviewer is not allowed to keep any copies of the manuscript or transfer the materials under review to any other side. The manuscript cannot be used for personal research purposes prior to its publication unless special permission is obtained from author;
  • Reviewer ensures that the manuscript is coherently written and contains all references to the cited or used works;
  • Reviewer should support his/her conclusions about the manuscript, thus ensuring that author and editor understand the basis of all comments and judgments;
  • Reviewer should point out if the manuscript bears considerable similarities to the works published earlier, i.e., report on plagiarism.
  1. Conflict of Interests

All participants of the publication process (authors of manuscripts, editorial board, and reviewers) must disclose any conflict of interests caused by potential competition, as well as their personal or other attitudes, etc. Authors are directly responsible for peaceful settlement of all conflicts that occur during manuscript preparation. The editorial board and reviewers must provide objective and impartial work on the manuscript submitted by authors. If any conflict situations arise at this stage, the persons concerned must delegate their responsibilities to other members of the editorial board or reviewers.

  1. The procedure of appeal against the decision of the editorial board

The author has the right to appeal the decision of the editorial board to reject the article or the corrections of the text at the direction of the reviewer. In the event of such a situation, the author must send a request with the statement of the problem and proof of their position in the name of the editor-in-chief of the Collection. Editor-in-chief, after reviewing the complaint, send the article for additional review or inform the author about the fairness of the reviewers' comments and the need to correct the article. 

 If there is proven evidence of plagiarism or falsification of data, the article is rejected without any new supply.