Publishing the articles having a positive expert decision is the principal activity of reviewed magazine “Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences”.
The articles published in the magazine are the result of the research of the authors and the societies they work for and they contribute to the development of the legal science and provide for the continuity of the scientific views.
With this, the present Statement sets standards for the ethical behavior of all the parties participating in the process of publishing, i.e. authors, editorial board, reviewers, publisher.
The standards rest upon the existing magazine and publisher policy.
Perm State National Research University, being the founder and the publisher of magazine “Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences”, bears the responsibility on controlling all the phases of the article publishing and recognizes its ethical and other responsibilities associated with the article publishing.
Authors are asked to provide the raw information (data) in connection with his research and should be prepared to provide public access to such data. The author is to keep such data for a reasonable time after publication.
The author submits a completely original article to the editorial board. If the author has used the work or includes fragments (extracts) of other authors into his work, such a usage should be correspondingly recorded (quotation marks, footnote to the citation source, mentioning the original source in the article bibliography). Any plagiarism is the author’s unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
The author should not submit manuscripts of the article published earlier. The author should not also supply the same manuscript to several magazines. Submitting the same manuscripts to several magazines is unethical and so unacceptable. Publishing of special works, for example, an article translation, in more than one magazine is acceptable with the agreement received from the editorial board of magazine “Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences” as a secondary publishing (with this the article should have a reference to the primary publishing).
In the bibliographic list, the author is to correctly acknowledge scientific and other sources which were used by the author during his research and which were influential for the results of the research. The sources having references in the manuscript text should be mandatory indicated. The data received from informal (private) sources (talking, letter writing, discussion with the third parties etc) is not to be used.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to getting the research result (concept and scientific idea development, etc). Allthosepeopleshouldbelistedasco-authors.
The author submitting an article to the editorial board should ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication to the editorial board of magazine “Perm University Herald. JuridicalSciences”.
The authors should disclose any financial or other conflict of interest which can influence their manuscript appraisal and interpretation.
All the sources of the project financial support should be disclosed and mentioned in the manuscript.
Should the author find an essential mistake or an inaccuracy in the work already published, he is to immediately inform the editorial board about that and assist in correcting it. Should the editorial board discover the mistake through the third parties, the author is to immediately correct the mistake or provide the evidences of no mistake.
The editorial board takes the decision about which of the articles submitted are to be published. For taking such decisions the editorial board is guided by the policies of the magazine and shall avoid publishing of the articles having signs of libel, contumely, plagiarism or copyright infringement. The article publication decision or the publication refusal decision is taken at the editors’ meeting with consideration for the reviewer’s opinion.
The editorial board evaluates the submitted manuscripts without regard to race, gender, nationality, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, citizenship, occupation, place of work and living of the author, as well as to his political, philosophical, religious and other views.
The editorial board takes a commitment to disclose the information about the submitted manuscript to anyone beside the author, the reviewer and – if necessary- the publisher.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in personal research of the editorial board members and of the editorial council members without the written consent of the author. The editor must not consider manuscripts in case he is in competitive relations with the author or the company connected with the research result, or there is other conflict of interest. The editors must demand from all the participants of the manuscript publishing process to disclose competitive interests.
The editors must quickly consider each complaint for the unethical behavior of the manuscript authors and published article authors irrespective of the time the complaint was received. The editors commit themselves to take an adequate reasonable measure regarding such complains. In case the complaint arguments are true, the editors have the right to refuse the publishing of the article, to stop further cooperation with the author, to publish a corresponding retraction and take other necessary measures to stop the author’s unethical behavior in the future.
The peer review assists in taking the editorial decisions and helps the author to improve the manuscript. The peer review of the article submitted is an important part of the scientific communication and is the basis of the scientific research method.
The reviewer is to return the manuscript within the term stipulated by the editors. In case considering the manuscript and preparing of the review cannot be done within the stipulated period, the reviewer is to inform the editorial board about it.
The article manuscript submitted for the review shall be viewed as a confidential paper. The reviewer can show it to other people and discuss it with them only with the permission of the editor in chief.
Reviewing shall be done objectively. Personal criticizing of the author by the reviewer is inacceptable. All the reviewer’s conclusions shall be strictly reasoned.
The reviewers shall specify the works which had influenced the research results but were not mentioned by the author. Any usage of the conclusions, fragments (citations) of other people by the author shall be properly recorded and be forwarded by a corresponding reference to the source. The reviewer shall draw the editors’ attention to an essential similarity or coincidence in the reviewed manuscript and any other already published work known to the reviewer.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in personal research of the reviewer without the written consent of the author. The reviewer must not consider manuscripts having conflict of interests in case he is in competitive, cooperative or other relations with the author or the company connected with the manuscript.