All the members of the editorial board, authors, reviewers and publishers must abide by the rules of scientific publication ethics and take all necessary measures to prevent violation of the rules in order to maintain the high quality of the publications, to have the authors’ results acknowledged by the global scientific community and to avoid unfair practices like plagiarism, data fabrication or data falsification.
The editorial board of the scientific journal “Fauna of the Urals and Siberia” conforms in its work to the principles of publishing ethics stated in the Declaration of the Association of Science Editors and Publishers adopted at the international scientific and practical conference “World-Class Scientific Publication – 2016: Publishing Ethics, Peer-Review and Content reparation (Moscow, May 20, 2016).
Declaration of the Association of Science Editors and Publishers “Ethical Principles of Science Publications”
Adopted at the ANRI General Meeting held as part of the 5th International Scientific-Practical Conference “International-Standard Science Publishing-2016: Solution to the Problems of Publishing Ethics, Reviewing and Preparation of Publications,” Moscow, 20 May 2016.
1. This Declaration, developed by the Association of Science Editors and Publishers (ANRI), sets forth the ethical principles regulating the behavior of editorial offices, editors, reviewers, publishers and authors in the science publication sphere. The text of the Declaration is to be used as one document with each individual provision to be applied with due account of all the other applicable provisions.
2. Persons involved in the scientific and publication process seek to follow the principles of the Declaration and the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and other international associations of editors and publishers.
3. ANRI sees as its goal the formation in the scientific community of a clear idea of publication ethics, open and unequivocal condemnation of unethical behavior and total renunciation of any forms of cooperation leading to the production of “junk” publications which impede the development of science as a whole.
4. Editorial office ethical norms. The editorial team of a journal shall, in its activities, be guided by the principles of scientific rigor, objectivity, professionalism and impartiality.
5. Responsibility for compliance with ethical norms. Researchers, authors, editors, reviewers and publishers are ethically liable for the publications and the dissemination of the results of scientific research
6. Norms of communication with the authors. Interaction with the authors shall be based on the principles of fairness, politeness, objectivity, honesty and transparency.
7. Existence of the institution of reviewing. The entire content of a journal, except advertizing and editorial materials expressly presented as such, shall be subject to mandatory peer review (open, blind, double blind). Double blind reviewing is preferred.
8. Access to publications. The journals guarantee access to publications by keeping the materials at the country’s leading libraries and repositories of scientific information.
9. Information openness. The Internet page of a journal contains provisions on publication ethics and reviewing, a clear statement of the journal’s policy, rules of submitting manuscripts, instructions for authors and information on availability of materials (free or by subscription). ISSN and the address of the publishing house shall be indicted.
10. Information on paid services. All information on paid services, if any, shall be spelled out and be available on the journal’s site, approved by the chief editor. If the journal does not provide paid services this shall be indicated on the site.
11. Compliance with authorship ethical criteria. 1. An author is a person who has been extensively involved in the writing of the paper, in developing its concept, scientific design, collecting, analyzing and interpreting material; 2. Agreement of all the authors to see the work published is mandatory. All the co-authors shall meet these criteria.
12. Agreeing the final text of the article with the author. Publication of an article under the author’s name gives rise to copyright. The publication of a text not agreed with the author, and the addition of external persons to the list of co-authors constitutes a violation of copyright.
13. Time frame for delivering editorial office decisions. Editorial decisions shall be taken within a limited time frame and set forth in a clear and constructive form on the journal’s site in the instructions for authors.
14. Interaction with scientific and professional associations. The editorial offices seek to interact with professional scientific associations and sectoral communities to ensure a high quality of scientific work.
15. Preventing and curing ethical violations. It shall be the duty of science editors to prevent situations in which the authors, reviewers or any other actors involved in the production of scientific texts behave unethically, to ensure the withdrawal of bad-faith publications from the scientific domain, and to cooperate with the Ethics Council and scientific associations.
16. Conflict of interests. The editors urge the authors to disclose their relations with industrial and financial organizations that may lead to a conflict of interests. All the sources of financing shall be indicated by the authors in the body of the article.
ANRI deems the following to be unethical behavior in the sphere of science publications:
17. Requiring the authors to write reviews of their own articles as well as fixed or pseudo-reviewing. Such practice implies that the journal has no reviewing.
18. Offering agency services. Offering such services to authors as “turnkey publication,” correspondence with the editorial office on behalf of the author, finalizing articles on the reviewer’s recommendation, preparation of paid-for reviews.
19. Sale of co-authorship, gift co-authorship, changing the lineup of authors. Including in the list of authors the names of persons who have not made any intellectual contribution to research constitutes violation of copyright and ethical norms because it does not only mislead the readers, but is regarded as fraud.
20. Publication of materials of in absentia “scientific” conferences. Because the practice of such conferences is directly linked with machinations and fraud in the sphere of science, publication of materials of such conferences is deemed unethical as it contributes to the spread of pseudo-scientific texts.
21. Handing over of article texts to other journals without the authors’ approval. Publication of an article in a journal not agreed with the author shall be a violation of the author’s interests.
22. Transfer of author’s materials to third persons. Transfer of materials of articles sent to the editorial office to third persons other than reviewers and members of the editorial staff shall constitute a violation of copyright and the principle of confidentiality of editorial processes.
23. Quotation manipulation. Unwarranted overstatement of science-metric indexes, excessive self-quoting and friendly quoting, irrelevant references mislead readers and are interpreted as fraud.
24. Plagiarism, falsification and fabrications. The editorial office shall work with the texts of articles to prevent the appearance on the pages of its periodicals of bad-faith scientific publications containing plagiarism, falsification and fabrication of data.
Under this Declaration the coordinating and advisory body is the Ethics Council formed under the Association of Science Editors and Publishers.
This Declaration has been developed by the ANRI Ethic Council:
Kuleshova A. V., Kochetkov D. M., Abramov E. G., Belyayeva D. A., Kasyan A. S. , Maleshin S. Ya., Nosov D. M., Repetskaya A. L, Rostovtsev A. A., Filippov Yu. I., Shishlakova O. S.
Taking part in the drafting of the Declaration was ANRI President Kirillova O. V.