Publication Ethics

The editorial board of the journal "Anthropogenic Transformation of Nature" guides by:

 

The Editorial team of the Journal require unconditional observance of these rules from all participants in the publishing process.

REGULATION ON ETHICAL EDITORIAL POLICY STANDARDS OF THE JOURNAL "ANTHROPOGENIC TRANSFORMATION of NATURE"

  1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

1.1. This Regulation establishes the norms of ethical behavior for the parties involved in the process of publishing scientific articles in the journal "Anthropogenic Transformation of Nature": authors, editorial boards, reviewers, publisher, including the rules of decency, confidentiality, supervision of publications, consideration of possible conflicts of interest.

1.2. The Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education "Perm State University" (PSU), as a publisher, assumes responsibility for monitoring all stages of the formation of publications and recognizes its ethical and other obligations associated with the publication of scientific publications in the journal "Anthropogenic Transformation of Nature"

1.3. PSU and the editorial board of the journal "Anthropogenic Transformation of Nature" are consistently working on the strict observance of the principles of editorial ethics in accordance with the recommendations and standards of the International Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and also takes into account the valuable experience of reputable international journals and publishers. It is guided in its activities by the provisions of Chapter 70 "Copyright" of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

  1. ETHICAL STANDARDS PRESENTED TO AUTHORS OF PUBLICATIONS IN THE JOURNAL "ANTHROPOGENIC TRANSFORMATION of NATURE"

2.1. A standard for access to and storage of original research data. The author is obliged to submit the initial materials (data) of the research at the request of the editors and must be ready to provide public access to them. The author must keep this data for a reasonable time after publication for possible reproduction and verification.

2.2. Originality standard (inadmissibility of plagiarism and self-plagiarism). The author submits to the editors for consideration the manuscript containing the results of the original research. If the author has used works in the article or includes in his article fragments from works (quotations) of other persons, then such use should be properly formalized by indicating the original source in the references for the article. Plagiarism, as well as auto-plagiarism, in any form is unethical and unacceptable behavior of the author.

The editorial staff of the journal checks the articles for originality using the Antiplagiat service (https://www.antiplagiat.ru/). The originality of the manuscript must be at least 80%. It is inadmissible to use unfair textual borrowing and appropriation of research results that do not belong to the authors of the submitted manuscript.

2.3. The standard for the reliability of the results of scientific research. Authors must provide valid research results. Scientific results must be presented correctly and objectively. Knowingly erroneous or falsified statements are unacceptable.

2.4. One-time publication standard. The author submits to the editors a manuscript of an article that has not been previously published and has not been submitted to the editors of other journals. Submitting your manuscript to multiple journals at the same time is unethical and unacceptable. The same applies to translating an article into a foreign language.

2.5. Sources confirmation standard. The author undertakes to correctly indicate the scientific and other sources that he used in the course of the research and which had a significant impact on the results of the research in the references.

2.6. Manuscript Authorship Standard. All persons who have made a significant contribution to obtaining the research results should be indicated as co-authors of the article. The group of authors should be limited to these persons only. The author representing the editors of the manuscript guarantees that all co-authors are indicated by him, that they have all seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agree with its submission. Persons who have made a concomitant contribution to obtaining the scientific results presented in the article may be thanked in the text of the article.

2.7. Author's Conflict of Interest Disclosure Standard. Authors must disclose conflicts of interest that may affect the assessment and interpretation of their manuscript. Conflict of interest should be indicated in the text of the article with the authors' clarifications on this issue. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed and must be indicated in the manuscript.

2.8. Standard for correcting errors in published works. If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in an already published article, then he is obliged to immediately notify the editorial board of this in order to make a joint decision on the form of presentation of objective information. If the editorial board learns about the error from third parties, then the author is obliged to immediately eliminate the error or provide evidence of its absence.

  1. ETHICAL STANDARDS SUBMITTED TO THE EDITORIAL BOARD OF THE JOURNAL "ANTHROPOGENIC TRANSFORMATION of NATURE"

3.1. Standard for making a decision to publish an article. The editorial board of the Journal decides which of the articles submitted to the editorial office should be published, based on the results of checks for compliance with the design requirements and the results of peer review. Works are allowed solely on the basis of their scientific value.

When deciding on the publication of a manuscript, the editorial board is guided by the policy of the journal and does not allow the publication of articles with signs of slander, insult, plagiarism or copyright infringement. The final decision to publish an article or to refuse it is made by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal. The editor is responsible for the publication of the copyrighted works.

3.2. Equality standard for all authors. The editorial board evaluates only the intellectual content of the manuscripts, 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.

3.3. Confidentiality standard. The editors undertake to ensure the confidentiality of the content of the submitted manuscript, which consists in the inadmissibility of transferring information to third parties. The editorial board should not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the author, reviewers and publisher.

3.4. Standard of disclosure of conflicts of interest by the editorial staff. The editors guarantee that the materials of the rejected manuscript will not be used in their own works of the members of the editorial board without the written consent of the author.

The editorial board will refuse to review the manuscript if there is a conflict of interest arising from competition, cooperation or other relationships with authors and organizations associated with this work. The editorial board undertakes to require all participants in the process of publishing an article to disclose competing interests.

The editor-in-chief is obliged to require all authors to provide information on the existence of a conflict of interest and publish corrections, if any, are found after publication. May take other actions as necessary, such as posting a rebuttal or expressing concerns.

3.5. Ethical Complaints Standard. The editors promptly consider each ethical claim in relation to the submitted manuscript or published article, regardless of the time it was received. The editorial board undertakes to take adequate reasonable measures in respect of such claims. Such measures include notification of the author and consideration of the complaint, if necessary, further communication with the relevant institutes and research organizations. If the validity of the claim is confirmed, a correction, refutation or other relevant statement is published. The editors have the right to refuse to publish the article, terminate further cooperation with the author, as well as take other necessary measures to further suppress the unethical behavior of this author.

3.5. The citation standard of the edition in which the work is published. The editors should under no circumstances force authors to cite one of the publications issued by Perm State University as a necessary condition for the acceptance of the manuscript for publication. Any recommendations for citing works should be based on their scientific significance and pursue the goal of improving the presented material. Members of the editorial board can recommend sources to authors as part of the peer review procedure, but such recommendations cannot be reduced to instructions to cite one of the scientific journals published by Perm State University.

  1. ETHICAL STANDARDS PRESENTED TO REVIEWERS OF THE JOURNAL "ANTHROPOGENIC TRANSFORMATION of NATURE"

4.1. Standard for Reviewer Contributions to Editorial Decisions. Completed review of the manuscript facilitates editorial decisions and also helps the author improve the manuscript. The decision to accept the manuscript for publication, return it to the author for revision or rejection from publication is made by the editorial board based on the results of the review.

4.2. Reviewer qualification standard. The reviewer must have sufficient qualifications to evaluate the manuscript. A reviewer who believes that he is not competent on the issues discussed in the material should refuse to review.

4.3. Peer review time standard. The reviewer is obliged to provide a review within the time specified by the editorial board. If the review of the manuscript and preparation of the review is not possible in define time, then the reviewer must notify about the impossibility of reviewing the submitted manuscript.

4.4. Confidentiality standard on the part of the reviewer. The manuscript of an article submitted for peer review should be considered as a confidential document, regardless of the form of peer review chosen by the journal. The reviewer has the right to show it or discuss it with others only with the permission of the Editor-in-Chief. The reviewer is obliged not to use in any way the ideas and information presented in the manuscript prior to its publication.

4.5. Review objectivity standard. The reviewer undertakes to carry out an objective peer review of the manuscript. Personal criticism of the author by the reviewer is unacceptable. The reviewer should evaluate the manuscript of the article for its scientific content, regardless of race, gender, nationality, citizenship or political beliefs of the authors of the manuscript. All conclusions of the reviewer must be strictly reasoned and provided with links to authoritative sources.

4.6. Sources confirmation standard. Reviewers should indicate works that influenced the research results, but were not cited by the author, if any. The reviewer is obliged to draw the attention of the editorial board to significant similarities or coincidences between the manuscript in question and a previously published other work that is known to the reviewer.

4.7. Conflict of Interest Disclosure Standard. The reviewer cannot use the materials of the unpublished manuscript in his own research without the written consent of the author. The reviewer is obliged to refuse to consider the manuscript, in connection with which he has a conflict of interest due to competitive, joint or other relations with the author or an organization related to the manuscript.

  1. RETRACTION (RECALL) OF ARTICLES

Articles with multiple publications, inaccurate information or infringement of authorship (plagiarism) will be retracted (withdrawn) from the journal, according the Guidelines for the recall of articles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Further, information about retracted article will be placed in the archive of the journal, transferred to the Ethics Council (Russian Association of Science Editors and Publishers), placed in the database of retracted articles, in all libraries, databases where the journal is located, for making an appropriate note indicating the reason and date of recall.