Home \ Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics

The journal Russian-Byzantine Herald adheres to recognized standards of publication ethics and recognizes that ensuring compliance with the principles of publication ethics is one of the main aspects of reviewing and publishing, and states its intention to avoid cases of the abuse of official position.

The journal Russian-Byzantine Herald states that adherence to the ethical norms and rules accepted by leading international scientific publishers is mandatory for all participants in the process of publishing scientific materials: authors, reviewers, members of the editorial board and of the editorial council, proofreaders, editors and employees of the publishing house.

The following editorial policy of the journal Russian-Byzantine Herald follows the recommendations of the International Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE Code of Conduct).

Editor-in-chief and Editorial Board

  1. The general management of the journal is carried out by the editor-in-chief and the editorial board.
  2. The editor-in-chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the editorial board of the journal should be published.
  3. The decision to publish a manuscript is made on the basis of the peer reviews received and the opinions of the members of the editorial board. The evaluation of a submitted manuscript should be based solely on its intellectual content and the quality of the scientific results obtained, regardless of the gender, race, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship or political views of the author.
  4. The editor-in-chief and the editorial board of the journal should require the authors of the journal to provide information on conflicts of interest, and to publish refutations or corrections in the journal if a conflict of interest is revealed after publication.
  5. Since publication in the journal is free of charge, the editor-in-chief and the editorial board of the journal should exercise control over the absence of any financial interactions between the authors and the staff of the journal (including peer reviewers).

Reviewers and Review Process

  1. The process of peer review should help the editor-in-chief and the editorial board of the journal in deciding whether to publish an article.
  2. Reviewing through the editorial communication with the author should help the author to improve the quality of the article.
  3. In case of a refusal to publish an article, the editor-in-chief and the editorial board of the journal should not enter into discussions with the authors.
  4. The identity of the reviewers should not be disclosed to the authors, as well as the identity of the authors should not be disclosed to the reviewers. This practice is called “double-blind peer review”.

Efficiency of Review Process

A reviewer who considers himself not competent to review a submitted manuscript, or who believes that he is unable to review it in a timely manner, should immediately notify the editor-in-chief or the editorial board of the journal in order to exclude himself from the review process.

Confidentiality and Objectivity

  1. Each manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document.
  2. The manuscript may not be shown or discussed by the reviewer with third parties, with the exception of persons specifically authorized by the editor-in-chief or the editorial board of the journal.
  3. Reviews should be carried out in an objective manner.
  4. Any feedback or comments of the reviewer designed to hurt or offend the author are unacceptable.
  5. During the process of reviewing the manuscript, a reviewer should express his point of view clearly, succinctly and reasonably, avoiding language that allows arbitrary interpretation.

Disclosure of Information and Conflict of Interest

  1. It is unacceptable for a reviewer to use in his own work any previously unpublished information set forth in the article submitted for review.
  2. It is unacceptable for a reviewer to use for personal gain or in any other personal interest any confidential information or scientific ideas learned by him while reviewing a manuscript.
  3. A reviewer is not allowed to participate in the review process in the event of a conflict of interest arising from any kind of competition, cooperation or other relationship between him and the author, scientific organization or institution involved in the authorship of the article.

Retraction (Article Withdrawal from Publication)

1. Grounds for article retraction: incorrect and / or unformed borrowing (plagiarism); duplication of an article in several publications; self-plagiarism with a large amount of repetition; falsification or fabrication; serious errors in the publication, calling into question its scientific value; incorrect list of authors; hidden conflict of interest; re-publication without the author’s consent; other violations.

2. Article retraction is initiated by: the author / group of authors; at the request of a person who is not a member of the team of authors; the editorial board of the journal.

3. The article retraction procedure is formalized by the Protocol of the meeting of the editorial board of the journal, which is sent to the Scientific Electronic Library (SEL) (eLibrary.ru).

4. Information about the retraction of the article is placed in the next issue of the journal after the date of the decision and on its official website.


Originality and Plagiarism

  1. Plagiarism - submitting someone else’s work as one’s own, copying or paraphrasing essential parts of someone else’s work (without reference to the source), or claiming intellectual rights over the results obtained in studies performed by others – is an unethical behavior and is unacceptable at any stage of the publication process.
  2. The author of an article is required to guarantee that the submitted work is completely original. If he has used the work / works of other authors, this must be appropriately marked by references or directly indicated in the text.
  3. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is an unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
  4. The author should recognize the works of other researchers and provide references to publications that have influenced the content of the submitted manuscript.

Manuscript Authorship

  1. The authorship of an article should be limited only to those persons who have made a significant contribution to the concept, development and writing of the submitted manuscript. Such individuals should be listed as co-authors.
  2. Any person who has taken part in any significant part of the research project should be expressed acknowledgements or should be included in the list of co-authors.

Information Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

  1. Authors should disclose in the manuscript any financial or other significant conflict of interest that could be interpreted as affecting the results of the review and evaluation of their manuscript.
  2. All sources of financial support, in one way or another connected with the article, should be disclosed by the author.

Errors in Published Works

  1. When an error or inaccuracy is found in a published article, its author is required to urgently inform the editor-in-chief or the editorial board of the journal about this error in order to publish a refutation or correction to the article.
  2. When errors or inaccuracies are found in a published article by the editor-in-chief or the editorial board of the journal, including upon receiving information about such errors from third parties, the author is required to urgently take action to publish a refutation or correction of the article, or to submit evidence to the editor-in-chief or the editorial board demonstrating the correctness of the published article.