Этика публикации
Ethical requirements of the journal «BULLETIN OF SHAKARIM UNIVERSITY. SERIES OF PHILOLOGY» are based on the agreements adopted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK) of Elsevier.
The editorial team adheres to standards of professional behavior in the relationship between authors, reviewers, editors, publishers and readers in the creation, distribution and use of scientific publications.
Ethics of publishing scholarly articles
The main criteria for acceptance or rejection of a manuscript by the editorial office are the relevance and scientific significance of the submitted article, its compliance with the journal topics, originality of the article and reliability of data, clarity of presentation of the material, compliance of the article with all the requirements of the journal.
Editorial Board guarantees full confidentiality in the process of receiving, processing and reviewing articles. The basis for acceptance of the article for publication by the editorial board is a positive assessment of two reviewers, in the case of opposite evaluations of reviewers positive and negative, the editorial board collegial decision about the article and options for its revision, notifying the author about it.
The editorial board does not allow conflicts of interest in the process of interaction with authors and reviewers. The journal practices charging a fee for publication, none of the categories of authors , including employees of Shakarim University in Semey, where the journal is published, is exempt from this fee, all authors are on equal terms.
Ethics of Authors of Scientific Publications
Authors guarantee that sent for publication in the “Bulletin of Shakarim University. Series of Philology” manuscript is original, written in one of the languages of the journal, not previously published in whole or in part. Submission of the same manuscript to different journal(s) at the same time is perceived as unethical behavior and provides grounds for withdrawing the article from consideration.
The author (or team of authors) is aware that they bear responsibility for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research, which implies compliance with the following principles.
The authors of the article should present reliable results of their research. Obviously erroneous or falsified statements are unacceptable.
Authors must ensure that the research results presented in the submitted article are completely original. Borrowed fragments or statements must be issued with the obligatory indication of the author and the original source. Excessive borrowing, as well as plagiarism in any form, including unformulated quotes, paraphrasing or assigning rights to the results of other people's research, is unethical and unacceptable.
It is necessary to recognize the contribution of all persons who somehow influenced the course of the research, in particular, the article should contain links to works that were important during the research.
Authors should not submit to the journal an article that has been sent to another journal and is under review, as well as an article that has already been published in another journal. Submitting an article to multiple publications at the same time is unethical and unacceptable.
All persons who have made a significant contribution to the research should be listed as co-authors of the article. It is not allowed to include people who did not participate in the study as co-authors.
The author submitting the article must ensure that all co-authors (if any) agree to its final version and submit it for publication in the journal.
If the author finds significant errors or inaccuracies in the article at the stage of its review or after its publication, he/she should notify the editorial board of the journal as soon as possible.
The journal reserves the right to reject any manuscript submitted for publication that does not comply with the above principles.
The source of research funding, if any, should be announced and indicated, and its role in conducting research and / or preparing the article should be stated.
Ethics of reviewing scientific publications
The reviewer carries out a scientific examination of the author's materials, as a result of which his actions must be unbiased, consisting in the implementation of the following principles.
A reviewer should agree to review only those articles that they have sufficient knowledge to evaluate and that they can review in a timely manner.
The reviewer must respect the confidentiality of the review and not disclose details of the article or review during or after the review to anyone except those authorized by the editors (for example, the editor).
A manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document that cannot be passed on for review or discussion to third parties not authorized by the editor.
The reviewer is obliged to give an objective and reasoned assessment of the presented research results. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for review should not be used by the reviewer for personal purposes. The assessment must be carried out objectively, the conclusions must be clearly formulated and reasoned so that the authors can use them to improve their work.
