Ethical standards of the publication process


   The rules of the publication ethics of the scientific journal “Center and Periphery” are based on international standards proposed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (Chapter 70 “Copyright”). Compliance with ethical norms and rules is mandatory for all parties involved in the publication process: authors, reviewers, members of the editorial board and publishing staff. Ethical obligations of authors When submitting the material, the author (or a team of authors) is responsible for the novelty and authenticity of the results of scientific research, which implies the fulfillment of the following obligations:

 – provide reliable results of the research, conducted qualitatively and thoroughly, in accordance with ethical and legal standards (the data must be presented clearly and concisely, include only authentic facts and information; the work must contain a sufficient number of bibliographic references to confirm the reliability of the results obtained);

 – submit only original works to the editorial office (authors must ensure that the articles proposed for publication has not been published anywhere before, is not sent to several periodicals at the same time; borrowed fragments or statements must be issued indicating the authorship and primary sources in compliance with the citation rules; all articles, submitted for publication in the scientific journal are subject, to mandatory verification through the “Anti-plagiarism” system, the level of originality of the submitted material must be at least 75%);

 – recognize the contribution of all persons who influenced the course of the research, as a result, the article should contain references to works that mattered during the research;

 – respect the authorship of the article (the list of authors of the article should include persons who have made a significant contribution to the development of the project, the concept of the research, its implementation, as well as interpretation of the presented research; it is unacceptable to indicate among the co-authors persons who did not participate in the research; at the time of submitting the article, all authors must give consent for the publication of the final version of the article in a particular periodical and attribution in a certain order);

 – follow the rules for the design of the article established by the editors;

 – respect the work of the editorial board and reviewers (eliminate comments on the article made by the editorial board or a reviewer conscientiously and within the established time limits; when submitting the article to the editorial board confirm the participation in making essential changes, editing and eliminating errors at all stages of preparing the article for publication, as well as in the final approval of the version to be printed);

 – disclose the sources of funding and possible conflicts of interest associated with them (the author should report any potential conflict of interest that could be affected by the publication of the results contained in the manuscript).


Ethical obligations of reviewers


    The reviewer is responsible for the scientific peer review of copyrighted materials to determine the possibility of their publication, which imposes on him the need to fulfill the following obligations:

 – give consent to review only those manuscripts for which he has sufficient knowledge to evaluate, and will be able to do it in time (a reviewer who believes that he is not an expert on the issues considered in the article or will not be able to prepare a peer review by a certain deadline must promptly inform the editor-in-chief or the editorial board about the impossibility to peer review the submitted article);

 – consider the manuscript submitted for peer review as a confidential document (it is not allowed to give the manuscript of the article for review or discussion to third parties who do not have authority from the editorial board of the journal; confidentiality can only be violated if the reviewer claims that the materials contained in the article are unreliable and falsified); – recognize that the manuscripts sent for peer review are the intellectual property of the authors (it is not allowed to use the information obtained during the review for the own benefit and personal goals of the reviewer);

 – review the article according to the rule of “open” peer review (the author of the article and the reviewer have information about each other); – give an objective assessment of the results of the research (the review should contain reasoned criticisms on the relevance of the research, its compliance with the profile of the journal, the novelty and reliability of the results, the level and clarity of the statement of the presented material, clearly justified recommendations for improving and finalizing the article; personal criticism of the authors of the article is not allowed);

 – refuse to peer review the manuscript if there is a conflict of interest. Ethical obligations of the editor-in-chief and editorial board The editor-in-chief and the editorial board, as an advisory body consisting of a group of competent scholars in the subject of the journal, are responsible for making the final decision on the preparation and evaluation of submitted manuscripts and the publication of the scientific journal, which includes the fulfillment of the following obligations:

 – improve the journal, ensure the quality of published materials without hindering the freedom of the author’s self-expression, excluding the satisfaction of financial needs to the detriment of scientific and ethical standards;

 – consider all manuscripts submitted for publication (manuscripts are evaluated for their scientific content, regardless of race, nationality, religion, as well as the position and place of work of the authors);

 – keep confidentiality when accepting a manuscript (do not disclose information about the submitted manuscript to all persons except the author, reviewers, editorial staff, publisher unless necessary; ensure that the materials of the manuscript rejected from publication will not be used in the own works of the editor-in-chief and members of the editorial board without the written consent of the author);

 – send manuscripts submitted for publication to reviewers for peer review (the reviewers are recognized experts on the subject of peer-reviewed materials who have deep professional knowledge and experience in a particular scientific field and have publications on the subject of the peer reviewed article within the last 3 years; if the editorial board of the journal does not have the opportunity to involve a specialist of the proper level in the field of knowledge to which the content of the manuscript belongs in the review, it is possible to request the author to provide an external review; the editor-in-chief may reject the manuscript without a review procedure if it does not correspond to the profile of the scientific journal);

 – make a final decision to publish the article based on the positive peer review of the reviewers, the reliability, originality of the presented data and the scientific significance of the submitted manuscript;

 – stop work on preparing a manuscript for publication if violations of publication ethics are found, expressed in plagiarism, submission of previously published materials to the journal, falsification of data;

 – inform the author of the decision to accept the manuscript for publication or reject it (in the latter case, substantiate their decision);

 – provide the author of the peer reviewed material with an opportunity to substantiate his research position;

 – do not force authors to cite certain works as a prerequisite to accept the manuscript for publication (recommendations for citing works should be based on their scientific significance and aim to improve the submitted material; sources can be recommended to authors as part of the peer review procedure, but such recommendations are not mandatory);

 – promote the adoption of adequate measures in case of ethical claims concerning the reviewed manuscripts or published materials (timely identify a conflict situation, interact with the authors of the manuscripts, with relevant organizations, argue the relevant complaint or requirement);

 – the editor-in-chief is to decide on the information received from the authors, reviewers, members of the editorial board about the presence of a conflict of interest (disclose relations with scientific organizations, foundations that can lead to a conflict of interest).


Ethical obligations of the publisher


     The publisher is responsible for the publication of copyrighted works, which entails the need to fulfill the following obligations:

 – comply with modern recommendations concerning publication ethics (ensure the fulfillment of ethical obligations by the editorial office, the editorial board, reviewers and authors);

 – provide support to the editorial office of the journal to consider claims to the ethical aspects of published materials (take adequate response in case of ethical claims concerning the reviewed manuscripts or published materials, and help interact with other journals and/or publishers, if this contributes to the performance of duties by editors);

 – ensure the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript and any information until it is published;

 – protect intellectual property and copyright;

 – form an effective journal policy and mechanisms for its implementation;

 – ensure timely publication of the printed version of the journal;

 – after the publication of the printed version of the journal, send a mandatory copy of the journal to the Information Telegraph Agency of Russia (ITAR-TASS), as well as a mandatory copy of the journal in electronic form to the Russian Book Chamber and the Russian State Library; organize the placement of the journal on the appropriate electronic resources (the website of the publisher, the national database of the Russian Science Citation Index – on the eLIBRARY platform).