State Research Center of the Russian Federation

2, Avtomotornaya st


Publishing ethics

The collection of scientific articles “TRUDY NAMI” (hereinafter — Collection) are published and operated in accordance with the Russian Federation legislation. Establisher, Publisher, Editorial Board, Editors and Authors of the Collection accept and keep
to the ethical rules of scientific publications.

The ethical rules of scientific publications

Publication of materials in the Collection is not only a simple way of scientific communication, but also makes a significant contribution to the development of the relevant field of science. Thus, it is important to establish standards of the future ethical behavior of all parties involved in publication, namely: Authors, Editors of the Collection, Reviewers, Publisher and Establisher.


1.1. The decision to publish

The Editor-in-Chief of the Collection is personally and independently responsible for the decision to publish articles. The reliability of the work in question and its scientific significance should underlie the decision to publish. The Editor-in-Chief can be guided by the policy of the Collection Editorial Board, being limited by current legal requirements in respect of defamation, copyright law, legality, and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other Editors and Reviewers while making a decision on a publication.

1.2. The decision to publish

The Editor-in-Chief should evaluate intellectual content of the manuscripts without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, origin, nationality or political preferences of the author.

1.3. Confidentiality

If not needed, the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board must not disclose information about accepted manuscripts to other persons, with the exception of Authors, Reviewers, Potential Reviewers, other Scientific Consultants and Publishers.

1.4. Policy disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished data from manuscripts submitted for consideration cannot be used for personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained through peer review and the associated potential benefits must be kept confidential and not be used for personal gain.
Editors must reject to consider manuscripts in case of conflicts of interest as a result of competitive, cooperative and other interactions and relationships with Authors, and companies associated with the manuscript.

1.5. Supervision of publications

In case Editor-in-Chief provides convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions presented in the publication are wrong, the Publisher should be informed for the purpose of making the possibly quickest changes, withdrawing the publications or expressing concern about the situation, and of other relevant cases.

1.6. The involvement in the research and cooperation

Editor-in-Chief, together with the Publisher shall adequately respond to ethical claims relating to reviewed manuscripts or published materials.


2.1. Diligence

Any chosen Reviewer who does not feel himself adequately qualified for considering the manuscript or does not have enough time for a quick performance, should notify the Editor-in-Chief and ask to exclude him from the process of peer reviewing the relevant manuscript.

2.2. Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for a review, should be regarded as a confidential document. This work cannot be opened and discussed with any persons who do not have the authority from the Editor-in-Chief.

2.3. Objectivity and requirements for manuscripts

The Reviewer is required to give an objective assessment. The personal criticism of the Author is not acceptable. Reviewers should clearly and convincingly express their opinions.

2.4. Recognition of primary sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published materials, corresponding to the topic and which are not included in the bibliography in the manuscript. The manuscript must provide a corresponding bibliographic reference to any statement (observation, conclusion or argument) published earlier. The Reviewer should also pay attention of the Editor-in-Chief for the detection of substantial similarity or coincidence between the manuscript under consideration and any other published works in the field of Reviewers scientific competence.

2.5. Policy disclosure and conflicts of interests

Unpublished data from manuscripts submitted for consideration, cannot be used for personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained through peer reviewing and the associated potential benefits must be kept confidential and cannot be used for personal gain.
Reviewers should not participate in the consideration of the manuscripts if there are conflicts of interest as a result of competitive, cooperative and other interactions and relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other institutions associated with the submitted work.


3.1. Requirements for manuscripts

Requirements for manuscripts Authors should provide reliable results of the work done, as well as an objective discussion of the importance of research. The data underlying the work should be presented correctly. Work should contain sufficient details and bibliographic references for possible playback. False or knowingly false statements are perceived as unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

3.2. Access to data and storage

The raw data related to the manuscript may be requested from the Author for Editors review. The Authors should be prepared to provide public access to such information, if possible, and in any case must be prepared to store the data for an adequate period of time after publication.

3.3. Originality and plagiarism

Authors should ensure that the submitted work is completely original and in case of other Authors’ works or statements the relevant bibliographic references or extracts must be provided. Plagiarism can exist in many forms, from submitting someone else’s work as the Author’s to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of other works (without attribution), and to the claim of the rights to other people’s research results. Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical and unacceptable.

3.4. Plurality, redundancy and simultaneous publication

The Author should not publish the manuscript which is mostly devoted to the same research in more than one journal as the original publication. The presentation of the same manuscript simultaneously in more than one journal is perceived as unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

3.5. Recognition of primary sources

Authors should make references to publications that are significant for the execution of the submitted work. Data obtained privately, for example, in the course of the conversation, correspondence, or in the process of discussion with third parties, must not be used or represented without the written consent of the original source. The information obtained from the confidential sources, such as the evaluation of manuscripts and grants, should not be used without the written permission of the Authors conforming to the confidential sources.

3.6. Authorship of publications

The Authors of the publication can be only the persons who made a significant contribution to the formulation of the design idea of the work, the development, implementation or interpretation of the presented study. All those who have contributed significantly, should be designated as Co-Authors. In cases when the study participants made a significant contribution into a certain direction in the research of the project, they should be considered as the persons who have made a significant contribution to this study.
The Author should make sure that all the participants who made a significant contribution to the research are presented as Co-Authors, while those who did not participate in the study wouldn’t be considered as collaborators. The Author should make sure that all Co-Authors have seen and approved of the final version of the work and agreed to its submission for publication.

3.7. Significant errors in published works

In case the Author of the material discovers errors or inaccuracies in the publication, he must inform the Editor-in-Chief of the Collection or the Publisher and cooperate with the Editor-in-Chief for the early withdrawal or correction of the publication. If the Editor-in-Chief or the Publisher receives information from a third party that the publication contains significant errors, the Author is obliged to remove the work, or to correct mistakes as soon as possible.


4.1. The Publisher (Establisher) should follow the principles and certain procedures to facilitate the execution of the ethical responsibilities of Editors, Reviewers and Authors in accordance with these rules.

4.2. The Publisher (Establisher) must support Collection Editors in considering claims to the ethical aspects of published materials and help interact with other journals and/or Publishers, if it contributes to the execution of duties of Editors.

4.3. The Publisher (Founder) should promote good practices for conducting research and implement industry standards in order to improve the ethical recommendations, withdrawal procedures and error correction.

4.4. The Publisher (Founder) should ensure the proper specialized legal support (opinion or advice), if necessary.

+7 (495) 456-57-02, ex. 244