Publication Ethics - About Journal - Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Management Series

Publishing ethics is a set of principles and rules governing the relationships between authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, and readers in the process of creation, dissemination and use of academic publications. Editorial Board and Editor-in-Chief should comply with:

1.1. Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board members follow the professional ethics principles relevant to the policy of the SPbU Publishing House and the standards of the Committee on the Publications Ethics (COPE Guidelines. URL: http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines#ethical_editing).

1.3. The Editor-in-Chief makes publication decisions basing on academic reviews and opinions of the Editorial Board members. In making publication decisions the Editor-in-Chief may confer with reviewers and the publisher.

– The Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board members are guided by the authenticity of the presented data and the scientific significance of the submitted paper. The manuscript should be relevant, original, and unpublished previously. The manuscript should be written in the context of up-to-date scientific literature, and contain an obvious element of new knowledge.

– Intellectual content of the manuscript is evaluated on the basis of principles on tolerance in accordance with «Declaration of Principles on Tolerance» approved by resolution 5.61 General Conference of UNESCO on 16 November, 1995.

1.4. Upon detection of significant errors and inaccuracies in the published paper the Editor-in-Chief should immediately take responsive measures relevant to that particular situation: publish the retraction, corrections, clarifications, etc. down to the official withdrawal of the article from the journal, and inform the head of the organization or department where the author works, international bibliographic services indexing the journal, and the journal's readers as well.

1.5. Confidentiality. Editors and the editorial board should not disclose information about submitted manuscripts to third parties, except for authors, reviewers, and other consultants, unless necessary. Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts should not be used for personal purpose and/or disclosed to third parties without the written consent of the author. Information and ideas obtained in the process of reviewing, editing should be kept confidential.

1.7. The editor must abandon submitted materials if there is a reasonable plagiarism concern. The Editorial Office checks the originality of the materials with the help of Safe-Assign program in the Blackboard system (https://bb.spbu.ru/).

1.8. An editor should take adequately responsive measures in the event of ethics complaints regarding reviewed manuscripts or published materials: collaboration with the publisher, with authors, relevant organizations and research centers

2.1. Reviewers provide scientific expertise (peer review) of submitted materials. In their cooperation with the editorial office of the journal reviewers are requested to follow the principles of scientific and professional ethics, relevant to SPbU Publishing House and Editorial Office policy as well as standards of the Committee on publication ethics (see. Hames I. COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. 2013. URL: http://publicationethics.org/files/Peer%20review%20guidelines_0.pdf).

2.3. Any manuscript submitted for review should be treated as a confidential document. It should not be passed to third parties, discussed with any person who has not been duly authorized by the editor. Breach of confidentiality is only possible in the case of reviewer’s statement about the inauthenticity or falsification of the paper materials. Unpublished data, information or ideas obtained in the course of reviewing should be kept confidential and may not be used for personal benefit, and for the interests of third parties and organizations.

2.4. The reviewers should give impartial, objective, and reasoned assessment of the materials. They should pay the editor's attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the reviewed manuscript and any other published paper in the field of their scientific competence.

2.5. The reviewer should avoid intolerance to the author’s point of view and position, emotional value judgments, pejorative comments, regardless of the quality of the peer-reviewed manuscript. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

2.6. Any appointed reviewer who: 1) realizes the inadequacy of his or her qualifications to review the manuscript; 2) lacks the time to complete the job on time; 3) supposes the possibility of interests conflict related to competition, cooperation or other relations with any of the authors, company or institution, relevant to the article, should notify the Editorial Office and request to be excluded from reviewing the respective manuscript.

3. Duties of Authors

3.1. In their cooperation with the editorial office authors are requested to follow the principles of scientific and professional ethics, relevant to SPbU Publishing House policy, Editorial Office, and standards of the Committee on publication ethics as well (COPE. URL: http://publicationethics.org/).

3.2. The author (authors) should submit a manuscript, containing the authentic study results and objective discussion of the research importance. Deliberately false or fraudulent statements are unacceptable.

3.3. Authors are personally liable for the novelty and validity of the results of scientific research and must guarantee that the paper is completely original and has not been published elsewhere nor is it currently under consideration in the same or substantially similar form for publication elsewhere. When using ideas or results of other persons in manuscripts submitted for publication, authors will give full attribution of sources. If the ideas or results have not been published, they may not be used without permission of the original researcher. Excessive borrowing and plagiarism in any form, including unreferenced quotes and/or paraphrases are unacceptable. Presenting one's own previously published work, in whole or in part, is considered to be the self-plagiarism and is unacceptable.

3.4. Authors may be asked to provide the raw data referenced in the manuscript to be reviewed and evaluated by the editors. If feasible author(s) should be ready to provide open access to such information (according ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases, URL: http://www.stm-assoc.org/), and keep it for reasonable period of time after publication.

3.5. All participants who have made a substantive contribution to the research should be mentioned as co-authors, and those who have not participated in the research should not be mentioned as co-authors. Individuals will claim authorship of a paper if they: conceived the ideas of the research design, participated in execution of the study, analyzed and interpreted the data, and wrote the manuscript. The final version of the paper and its submission for publication must be approved by all co-authors. The order in which authors are listed is determined by their joint decision.

3.6. Should the author find out significant errors or inaccuracies in the paper on the stage of its consideration or after its publication, he/she must inform the editorial office/publisher as soon as possible and collaborate with them to retract the publication or to correct the errors.

3.8. For ease of distribution and to ensure proper policing of use of materials the authors conclude a license agreement and grant the publisher the exclusive property rights in the manuscript, unless otherwise is specified.