The editorial Board of the journal "Izvestiya of Saratov University. New series. Physics series" follows the editorial ethics of the journal "Izvestia of Saratov University. New series"


Editorial ethics
Journal "Izvestiya of Saratov University. New series»
Taken at a meeting of the Academic Council
University from 01.07.2014, Protocol № 8.
Approved by the rector of SSU 14.07.2014
    The editorial Board of the journal "Izvestiya of Saratov University. A new series of" responsibly to the task of maintaining a scientific reputation. Our journals publish scholarly works and we bear responsibility for their compliance with the highest standards. The editorial Board of the journal does its best to comply with ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community and to prevent any violations of these norms.
    This document is prepared in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on the ethics of scientific publications (Committee of publication Ethics[1]), taking into account the experience of leading international Publishers[2] and editorial Boards of journals.
1. Duties of editor-in-Chief and members of the editorial Board
1.1. The decision to publish
The editor-in-chief (hereinafter the Editor) of the journal is personally and independently responsible for making the decision on publication. The reliability of the considered work and its scientific significance should always be the basis of the decision on publication. The editor is guided by the policy of the Editorial Board of the journal, being limited by the relevant legal requirements in respect of libel, copyright, legality and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other members of the editorial Board and Reviewers in making publication decisions.
1.2. Impartiality
The editorial Board must evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the Authors.
1.3. Privacy
The editor and other members of the editorial Board should not disclose any information about the accepted manuscript to third parties. If necessary, disclosure of information about the accepted manuscript is allowed only to Authors, Reviewers, potential Reviewers, other consultants of the editorial Board and the Publisher.
1.4. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest
1.4.1. Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts should not be used in the works of members of the editorial Board without the written consent of the Author. Information and / or ideas obtained during the review of manuscripts should be kept confidential and may not be used for their own benefit by persons who have received access to manuscripts.
1.4.2. Members of the editorial Board should refuse to review the manuscript (namely, ask the Editor, Deputy editor or other members of the Editorial Board to consider the resulting manuscript instead) in the event of a conflict of interest expressed in the presence of competition, joint work or other relationships and relationships with any of the Authors, companies and possibly other organizations related (or – related) to this manuscript.
1.5. Monitoring of publications
A member of the editorial Board, who provided convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions presented in the publication are incorrect, must inform the Editor (and/or the Editorial Board) in order to promptly notify the changes, withdrawal of the publication, expression of concern and other relevant situation statements.
1.6. Involvement and collaboration in research
The editorial Board must take appropriate responsive measures in case of ethical complaints concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. Such measures generally include interaction with the authors of the manuscript or published article and the argument of the relevant complaint or claim, but may also involve interaction with relevant organizations and research centers.
2. Responsibilities Of Reviewers
2.1. Influence on editorial Board Decisions
Reviewing helps the editorial Board to make a decision about the publication and through appropriate interaction with the Authors can help the Author to improve the quality of the work. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific approach. The editorial Board of the journal shares the view that all scientists who want to contribute to the publication are obliged to perform significant work on reviewing the manuscript.
2.2. Sense of duty
Any selected Reviewer who feels lack of qualifications to review the manuscript or not having enough time for a quick carry out the work, should notify the editorial Board and ask them to exclude him from the process of reviewing the relevant manuscripts.
2.3. Privacy
Any manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. This work can not be opened and discussed with any persons who do not have the authority of the editorial Board.
2.4. Manuscript requirements and objectivity
The reviewer is obliged to give an objective assessment. Personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable. Reviewers should Express their opinion clearly and arguably.
2.5. Recognition of primary sources
Reviewers should pay attention of the authors to the important works of other researchers corresponding to the topic of the reviewed manuscript and not listed in the bibliography. Any statement used in the manuscript (observation, conclusion or argument) taken from previously published materials must be accompanied by a corresponding bibliographic reference. The reviewer should also pay attention of the editorial Board to the detection of any significant similarity or coincidence between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work known to the Reviewer.
2.6. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest
2.6.1. Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts should not be used in the personal interests of the Reviewer without the written consent of the Author. Confidentiality of information and ideas received during the review of manuscripts should be preserved. This information and ideas may not be used for the personal benefit of the Reviewer.
2.6.2. Reviewers should not participate in the consideration of manuscripts in the event of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations associated with the submitted work.
3. Authors' Responsibilities
3.1. Requirements to the manuscripts
The scientific article should contain the results of original research. The authors should provide an accurate description of the work performed and objective evidence of its significance. Data confirming the results of the study should be given in the article as accurately as possible. The work should contain sufficient information and bibliographic references for possible reproduction of the described results. False and knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are considered unacceptable.
3.2. Data access and storage
To conduct editorial review authors may be required intermediate (unprocessed) data relating to the manuscript. Authors should be prepared to provide free access to such information in accordance with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases, if feasible. In any case, Authors should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
3.3. Originality and plagiarism
3.3.1. Authors should submit entirely original works. In the case of the use of works or the approval of other authors, such works or statements should be appropriately quoted or marked.
3.3.2. Plagiarism can exist in many forms: from the view of someone else's work as an author prior to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of other works (without attribution) and the application private rights to the results of other studies. Plagiarism in any form is considered unethical and unacceptable.
3.4. Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
3.4.1 In General, the Author should not publish the manuscript, for the most part on the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. The submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal at a time is perceived as unethical and unacceptable.
3.4.2. In General, the Author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
3.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. clinical guidelines, translations of articles) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and Editors of the journals concerned should agree to the secondary publication, presenting necessarily the same data and interpretations as in the primary published work. The bibliography of the primary work should be presented in the second publication. More information about the acceptable forms of secondary (repeated) publications can be found on the page 
3.5. Recognition of primary sources
Always recognize the contributions of others. the Authors should cite publications that have meaning to complete this work. Data obtained privately, such as during conversations, correspondence or discussions with third parties, should not be used or submitted without the Express written permission of the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources, such as the evaluation of manuscripts or the granting of grants, should not be used without the explicit written permission of the Authors of the work relating to confidential sources.
3.6. Authorship of the publication
3.6.1. The authors of the publication can only be persons who have made a significant contribution to the formation of the design, development, execution or interpretation of the study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. In cases where the study participants have made a significant contribution in a particular direction in the research project, they should be listed as persons who have made a significant contribution to the study.
3.6.2. The author in charge of correspondence with the editorial office should make sure that all participants who have made a significant contribution to the study are presented as co-Authors and not listed as co-Authors those who did not participate in the study, as well as make sure that all co-Authors saw and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.
3.7. Risks, as well as people and animals who are objects of research
3.7.1. If the work involves the use of chemical products, procedures or equipment, the operation of which may be any unusual risk, the Author should clearly indicate it in the manuscript.
3.7.2. If the work involves animals or people as objects of research, the Authors should make sure that the manuscript indicates that all stages of the study comply with the laws and regulations of research organizations, as well as approved by the relevant committees. The manuscript must be clearly stated that all the people who are the objects of research, obtained consent to conduct this study. The right to privacy must always be respected.
3.8. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest
3.8.1. All Authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that could be perceived as influencing the results or conclusions presented in the work.
3.8.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest necessarily should be disclosed include employment, consultancy, stock ownership, receipt of fees, provision of expert opinions, patent applications or patent registration, grants and other financial security. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed as soon as possible.
3.9. Significant errors in published papers
In case an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the publication the Author should inform the editorial Board of the journal and to interact with the editorial Board for the early withdrawal of the publication or correction of errors. If the editorial Board has received information from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, the Author is obliged to remove the work or to correct errors in the shortest possible time.
4. Duties Of The Publisher
4.1. The publisher must follow the principles and procedures that facilitate the performance of ethical duties by the Editor, members of the editorial Board, Reviewers and Authors in accordance with these requirements. The publisher must be sure that the potential profit from advertising or reprint production did not affect the decisions of the editorial Board.
4.2. The publisher should support the editorial Board of the journal in reviewing claims to ethical aspects of the published materials and help to interact with other journals and/or Publishers, if this contributes to the performance of the duties of the editorial Board.
4.3. The publisher has to promote good practice conduct research and implement industry standards to improve the ethical guidelines, withdrawal procedures, and correcting errors.