Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications
Ethical principles for the preparation of a scientific article by the author

    • Authors are obliged to publish only original articles, use only original research materials. All borrowings from other sources must be properly executed with the obligatory indication of the author and the original source. Plagiarism in any form, including unformatted quotations, as well as the assignment of rights to the results of other people's research, are unacceptable.
    • Authors should indicate the contribution of all persons whose work formed the basis of the study. Individuals who did not participate in the study should not be listed as co-authors.
      The authors of the article submitted for publication are obliged to rely on reliable results of the research. The use and disclosure of knowingly false data is unacceptable.
      The authors do not provide previously published works for publication in the journal, as well as works proposed for publication in other journals.
      The authors attach to the article their personal data (place of work, address of the place of work, position, e-mail), which are allowed for publication in the journal.
      The authors agree that their article will be sent for review (the name of the reviewer is not disclosed) and undertake to cooperate with the editors to improve, shorten or supplement their article in accordance with the reviewer's comments, as well as to correct these inaccuracies.
      If errors or inaccuracies are found in an article that is under consideration or has already been published, the authors should notify the editors of the journal as soon as possible.
      Ethical principles of interaction between the author and the editors

The editors are obliged:
1. Ensure compliance with academic standards and

2. Prevent conflicts of interest between business requirements

3. Be prepared to publish, if necessary, amendments to the internationally recognized publishing ethics standards for scientific publications. and principles of intellectual activity. denials and apologies.

Articles of a political nature, containing biased and incorrect assessments of other scientific works and other specialists are not accepted for publication.
When making a decision on the admission of an article for publication, the editors evaluate only the content of the article, regardless of the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, political and religious views, social origin and citizenship.
The editors of a scientific journal, when deciding on the publication of an article, are guided by: the reliability of the data; scientific significance and scientific novelty of the presented work.
In case of detection in the article of elements of copying from other scientific works (plagiarism) or facts of publication by the authors of the same article in different journals, the editorial board takes measures to find out the reasons for this violation of the ethics of publications, notifies the authors of this fact and reserves the right to remove the article from publication and in the future not to allow their article to be considered.
The editors strictly observe the confidentiality of the submitted articles: they do not use the materials received for publication for transfer to third parties or for personal purposes, without the written consent of the authors.
The editors provide detailed and substantiated answers to all claims of the authors, making every effort to resolve conflict situations.
Ethical principles of work of the reviewer

All submitted articles receive feedback from at least one reviewer, who is one of the leading experts in this scientific field.
The reviewer is obliged to give an objective and reasoned assessment of the stated results of the study. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts should not be used by the reviewer for personal purposes.
A reviewer who, in his opinion, does not have sufficient qualifications to evaluate the manuscript or cannot be objective, should inform the editor about this, with a request to exclude him from the review process of this manuscript.
The review analyzes the compliance of the submitted article with the requirements of the journal in terms of subject matter and volume, as well as evaluates the scientific and technical novelty, literacy and clarity of the presentation of the material, the persuasiveness of experimental data, and the representativeness of the bibliographic list.
Reviewers should avoid conflicts of interest with respect to the authors of the peer-reviewed article, the studies described in it, or the company that funded these studies.
The result of consideration of the article by the reviewer is the conclusion about the possibility of its publication - in the presented form, with revision, after fundamental revision (with re-examination) or about its rejection. This conclusion is approved by the editorial board of the journal.
Based on the results of external and internal (editorial) review, the author is sent a review on the article indicating the required improvements and the time frame in which they need to be done.