Publication Ethics
The mission of the «Russian Arctic» Journal is to spread scientific knowledge about the Arctic while ensuring ethical integrity.
The Journal’s editorial staff pursues a policy of honesty and transparency and makes sure all parties to the publication process, i. e. authors, editors, reviewers and the founder, comply with publication ethics.
The Guidelines on the Editorial ethics and standards of the «Russian Arctic» scientific Journal are based on ethical standards and norms adopted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), The Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).
The Responsibilities of the Editorial Desk:
1. The Editorial Desk publishes articles that have undergone double-blind peer review and a check for plagiarism. The articles are approved for publications based on their scientific value, relevance, high theoretical and practical significance.
2. When deciding whether to publish, the Editors are guided by the Journal’s policy and do not allow the publication of articles that contain slander, insults, plagiarism or copyright infringement. The final decision on publication is made by the Chief editor and the Scienсе Editor, who take responsibility for all published scientific articles.
3. The Editors of the Journal evaluate scientific content of the article only, regardless of race, nationality, origin, citizenship (citizenship), gender, occupation, place of work, residence of the Author, as well as his political, philosophical, religious and other views.
4. The Editorial Desk undertakes to protect the confidentiality of submitted material and not to disclose the Reviewer’s identity.
5. The Editorial Board of the Journal will refuse to consider an article if there is a conflict of interest arising from competitive, cooperative or other relations with Authors or organizations associated with the study. The Editors require that all participants of the publication process disclose competing interests.
The Responsibilities of the Author:
1. Concurrent submission to several journals is unacceptable and is considered as unethical behaviour. The same applies to the translation of an article into a foreign language and its publication in another journal (i.e. redundant publication).
2. If the Author uses text, quotes or any data originated by other Authors/researchers, such use should be properly acknowledged and referenced with the source cited in the bibliographic list. Any form of plagiarism is considered unethical and dishonest behaviour of the Author.
3. Research results provided by the Author should be sound and honest. Deliberately erroneous or falsified statements are unacceptable.
4. All individuals who made significant contributions to the study should be listed as contributing authors. Persons who made less substantial or technical contributions to the research may be acknowledged in the body of the article.
5. Authors should declare financial and any other relevant conflicts of interest in the body the article or report a conflict of interest to the editors of «Russian Arctic».
6. If the Author finds a significant error or inaccuracy in an already published article, they must immediately inform the Editors in order to take a joint decision on publishing a correction. If the Editorial staff are informed of an error by third parties, the Author must immediately correct the error or prove that the accusation is false.
The Responsibilities of the Reviewer:
1. If the Reviewer doesn’t feel competent to review a study on a particular issue, they should withdraw from the reviewing process.
2. The Reviewer undertakes to carry out a fair and objective assessment of the Manuscript. Personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable. The Reviewer’s conclusions should be reasonable and valid and be supported by references to reliable sources.
3. In case the Reviewer finds papers that influenced the Manuscript in question but were not appropriately referenced by the Author, the Reviewer must inform the Editors thereof. The Reviewer must inform the Editorial Desk of any significant similarities or overlap found between the Manuscript in question and a previously published other work.
4. A Manuscript submitted for review should be considered a confidential document. The Reviewer may not use the ideas and information presented in the Manuscript before its publication.
5. The Reviewer must withdraw from the reviewing process in case there’s a conflict of interest due to competitive, joint or other relations with the Author or organization related to the Manuscript under review.
6. The Reviewer is obliged to provide a review within the timeframe specified by the Editors. If the Reviewer understands that examining the Manuscript and preparing the review in a timely manner is impossible, they must notify the Editors thereof.
THE PROCEDURE FOR RETRACTION OF PUBLICATION
In the event of allegations of ethical misconduct regarding articles published in the Journal, the Chief editor together with the Founder take appropriate measures based on the «Retraction Guidelines»of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Such measures include an investigation of the alleged misconduct by the Editorial Desk of the «Russian Arctic», communication with the Authors and substantiating the complaint or claim, as well as communication with relevant organizations and research centres in the framework of cooperation on honest research, and retraction of the publication.