Theriologia Ukrainica

East European Journal of Mammalogy
(before 2018 as Proceedings of the Theriological School)
ISSN 2616-7379 (Print)  ISSN 2617-1120 (Online)


 

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

 

Google

 

 

 

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 Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors explicit written consent.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 reviewers 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 reviewers 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.

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 journals 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.

 


back to the journal >>>

web page created by Igor Zagorodniuk and Zoltán Barkaszi

created on 05.10.2016,
updated on 19.07.2021

 

Locations of visitors to this page