|
Menu
About the Journal
Contents
Author Guides
Editorial Policy
Editorial Board
Journal's History
Contacts
External
Links
Google Scholar
Vernadsky
National
Library of Ukraine
National
Museum
of Natural History
About
the Theriological School
|
 Publication
Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
The journal Therilogia Ukrainica
and its publisher, the National Museum of Natural History
of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, ensures
the respect of consistent and fair editorial policy, and
encourages authors to follow academic ethics.
The editorial board of the journal follows
the Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice based
on COPE's Code
of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors
and Code
of Conduct for Journal Publishers to ensure ethics and quality
in publication. The main aspects of responsibilities
of editors, authors, peer-reviwers, and the publisher are
presented below.
Editors
Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively
on the basis of their academic merit without regard to the
authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin,
citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional
affiliation. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over
the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing
of publication of that content. Editors and editorial staff
will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript
to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers,
potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher,
as appropriate. Editors and editorial board members will
not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted
manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’
explicit written consent.
Editors will not consider manuscripts in
which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive,
collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any
of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the
papers. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding
which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be
published, based on the validation of the work in question,
its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’
comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in
force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
Peer review
The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts
undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert
in the field. Any invited referee who feels unqualified
to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows
that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately
notify the editors and decline the invitation to review
so that alternative reviewers can be contacted. Any manuscripts
received for review are confidential documents and must
be treated as such.
Reviews should be conducted objectively and
observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments
so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript.
Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate. Reviewers
should identify relevant published work that has not been
cited by the authors. A reviewer should also notify the
editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between
the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript
(published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.
Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting
from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships
or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions
connected to the manuscript and the work described therein
should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts
of interest and decline the invitation to review so that
alternative reviewers can be contacted. Unpublished material
disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in
a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent
of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained
through peer review must be kept confidential and not used
for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also
to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Authors
Authors of original research should present
an accurate account of the work performed and the results
obtained, followed by an objective discussion of the significance
of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail
and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review
articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive.
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study
together with the manuscript for editorial review. Authors
should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely
original works, and if they have used the work and/or words
of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Plagiarism
in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour
and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit for consideration
a manuscript that has already been published in another
journal.
Only persons who meet these authorship criteria
should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must
be able to take public responsibility for the content. All
persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported
in the manuscript but who do not meet the criteria for authorship
must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged
in the "Acknowledgements".
Authors should disclose any conflicts of
interest that might be construed to influence the results
or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of
financial support for the work should be disclosed (including
the grant number or other reference number if any). Information
obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or
discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported
without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors
should not use information obtained in the course of providing
confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or
grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit
written permission of the author(s) of the work involved
in these services.
If the work involves the use of live animals,
the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed
in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines.
In particular, authors are recommended to comply with the
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Policy
Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction
and consult the IUCN
red list index of threatened species,
as well as with the Convention
on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
Additionally, authors should follow the legal requirements
for the care and use of animals according to the laws of
Ukraine "On Fauna" (>>>),
"On the Red Book of Ukraine" (>>>),
"On Protection of Animals from Cruel Treatment"
(>>>),
and other legislative acts of Ukraine.
Authors are obliged to participate in the
peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly
to editors’ requests. Authors should respond to the reviewers’
comments systematically, point by point, revising and re-submitting
their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given. When
authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their
own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify
the journal’s editors and cooperate with them to either
correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract
the paper.
Publisher
In cases of alleged or proven scientific
misconduct, the publisher will take all appropriate measures
to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question.
This may include the publication of an erratum, clarification,
or retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together
with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify
and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct
has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such
misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.
|
