Publication Ethics

GENERAL PROVISIONS

 Editorial board of Research Paper Collection: Theory and Practice of Forensic Science and Criminalistics encourages and motivates authors of research papers to comply with appropriate level of formal and ethical requirements for preparation and publication of scientific articles submitted to the collection Editorial board. These norms are determined by quality standards of research papers and their presentation (https://osvita.kpi.ua/files/downloads/Standart_EPVO.pdf), accepted by the world scientific society, in particular, by the publishing principles of the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK) https://www.elsevier.com/editor/perk, of Elsevier https://www.elsevier.com/editor/editorial-boards,  Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) https://publicationethics.org/, Ethical code of scientist of Ukraine https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/rada/show/v0002550-09#Text, as well as work experience of foreign and Ukrainian professional societies, scientific institutions, Editorial boards and editorial offices of publications. The following rules will provide significant assistance in preparation of scientific publications to scientists, teachers, graduate students, students of higher education institutions, law enforcement officers, judges, forensic experts and other practical workers.

It is very important to agree on the norms of ethical behavior for all parties involved in publication of research paper collection: author/co-authors of the publication, members of the Editorial board, reviewer, publisher, readers of research paper collection and other users of information presented in the collection.

Author is a natural person who created a work through his creative activity.

Advisory Board is a permanent collegial advisory body. The main tasks of the Advisory Board are: establishing a systematic dialogue and effective interaction of authors with reviewers, Editorial Board and helping to strengthen the authors' confidence in them; assistance in creating conditions that make impossible to use the journal content to restrict the rights and freedoms of citizens, as well as in the interests of individuals, political parties, public organizations, internal review of incoming articles.

Editorial Board is one of key components of a scientific edition that plays an important role in determining its quality, credibility and influences its inclusion in rating databases such as Scopus or Web of Science. This is a team of experts and specialists who are responsible for the selection and review of content published in the journal. It covers academics and professionals with extensive experience and credibility in the particular field or fields covered in the journal. Changes in composition of the Board shall be approved at the meeting by a simple majority of votes. In its activities, it is guided by international ethical rules of scientific editions.

Review is a post where research paper (article) is analyzed and evaluated, recommendation of a specialist (reviewer) on publication possibility or the need to finalize the article. The reviewer is the review author.

Editorial Board is responsible for supervising all stages of scientific publication. At the same time, the Editorial Board is aware of the fullness of ethical and other responsibility for quality and scientific novelty of the content and seeks to assist in establishing cooperation with other journals/collections and/or publishers.

The Editorial and Advisory Boards support the 2002 Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) published on June 20, 2003 (https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read/) and Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities dated on October 22, 2003 (https://openaccess.mpg.de/Berlin-Declaration), in particular, transition to the paradigm of electronic open access is an integral part of the ethics of our publication.

Editorial and Advisory Boards support the following provisions and principles of publishing ethics:

  • Core Practices of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
  • Principles of Transparency and Best Practice of Open Access Scholarity Publishing Association (OASPA): https://www.oaspa.org/resources/principles-of-transparency-and-best-practice-in-scholarly-publishing/
  • Standards of conduct and best practices for editors: https://openscience.in.ua/code-of-conduct.html
  • Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing  https://openscience.in.ua/bestpractice.html
  • Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement (PEMS): https://psycholing-journal.com/index.php/journal/publication-ethics
  • Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing: http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/bethesda.htm
  • Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI): https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/
  • Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (Berlin Declaration): https://openaccess.mpg.de/Berlin-Declaration
  • Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (perk): https://www.elsevier.com/editor/perk
  • Elsevier Publishing ethics: https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies-and-standards/publishing-ethics
  • ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals: https://www.icmje.org/
  • COPE Code of Conduct: https://publicationethics.org/files/2008%20Code%20of%20Conduct.pdf
  • Elsevier Editorial Independence Policy: https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies-and-standards/editorial-independence
  • Elsevier's educational content on ethics in research and publications:https://researcheracademy.elsevier.com/publication-process/ethics
  • WAME Professionalism Code of Conduct: https://wame.org/wame-professionalism-code-of-conduct
  • Sharing of Information Among Editors-in-Chief

  • Regarding Possible Misconduct (COPE): https://publicationethics.org/files/Sharing%20_of_Information_Among_EiCs_guidelines_web_version_0.pdf
  • Elsevier Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK): https://www.elsevier.com/editor/perk
  • Policies for Medical Journal Editors, prepared by the WAME Ethics and Policy Committee: http://www.wame.org/policies.
  • Sarajevo Declaration on Integrity and Visibility of Scholarly Publications: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5209927/.
  • WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/
  • The ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments)  https://nc3rs.org.uk/arrive-guidelines
  • Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986  https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/619140/ConsolidatedASPA1Jan2013.pdf
  • Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes:https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/chemicals/animals-science_en
  • Elsevier Patient Consent Policy: https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies-and-standards/patient-consent
  • EASE Statements and Endorsements: https://ease.org.uk/publications/ease-statements-resources/
  • The SAGER Guidelines: https://ease.org.uk/communities/gender-policy-committee/the-sager-guidelines/
  • EASE Guidelines for Authors and Translators of Scientific Articles to be Published in English: https://ease.org.uk/publications/author-guidelines-authors-and-translators/
  • EASE Quick-Check Table for Submissions: https://ease.org.uk/publications/ease-statements-resources/quick-check-table-for-submissions/
  • The EASE Form for Authors’ Contributions and Competing Interest Disclosure: https://ease.org.uk/publications/ease-author-form/
  • EASE Standard Retraction Form: https://ease.org.uk/publications/ease-statements-resources/ease-standard-retraction-form/
  • IEEE author ethics guidelines: https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/
  • IEEE Principles of Scholarly Publishing: https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/wp-content/uploads/IEEE_Publishing_Principles.pdf
  • Nature Portfolio Editorial Policies: https://www.nature.com/nature-portfolio/editorial-policies

 

 ETHICAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE AUTHORS

Reporting standards

 Authors/co-authors of the edition should conduct research not only in accordance with current legislation, but in accordance with the ethical norms of scientific activity. Primary responsibility of the author is to provide an accurate report about performed research in the edition. Research paper should contain a sufficient amount of information and references to primary sources that will allow others to use the assets of this research paper.

Authors of the articles are obliged to ensure the novelty, reliability and originality of the research results; finalize all content of other authors with precise indication of primary sources; avoid excessive borrowing and plagiarism in any form; prevent auto-plagiarism; ensure that the article is exclusive content and has not been previously published or offered to another publisher.

By submitting content for publication, the authors agree that if the content is accepted for printing and can be placed in electronic databases with obligatory indication of authorship and preservation of copyrights in full.

Submitting false information is tantamount to unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

 Data access and data retention

The Editorial Board may ask authors to provide additional input for editorial review. Authors should be prepared to provide free access to such data.

 Originality and Plagiarism

Authors/co-authors of scientific articles should submit only completely original research papers and if the authors/co-authors have used the papers and/or statements of other scientists, they should be properly cited in the form of quotations/references.

Quote is a fragment (excerpt) from a legally published research paper, recorded performance, legally released audio or video recording used with mandatory reference to its author and/or performer, producer of audio recording, producer of video recording and citation source by another person in order to make to make their own statements clearer or to refer to the expression of another person in an unchanged (authentic) form or in a translation of such a fragment (excerpt).

References is a list including only those sources where there are direct references in the text (when a quote from one or another author can be seen in the text).

Plagiarism is publication of a paper or its part  in an unchanged or modified form, including the publication of a translation of a foreign paper or its part, under the name of a person who is not the author of this paper.

There are various forms of plagiarism, for example, "publishing" someone else's article as one's own, copying or paraphrasing a significant part of someone else's text (without referring to the original source and indicating authorship), appropriating the results of research conducted by other scientists, etc. Plagiarism in all its forms is considered unethical behavior and is unacceptable. In case of detection of plagiarism, authors of the provided content are responsible.

The formulation of the main theses and conclusions by the authors should be clear and unambiguous without falsification of the obtained data or improper its manipulation.

In combating plagiarism, the editorial board is guided by the relevant Laws of Ukraine and regulations, in particular Art. 50 of the Law of Ukraine: On Copyright and Related Rights dated on 01.01.2023. No. 2811-IX, to prevent borrowing in written or electronic form, published in whole or in part under its own name without reference to the author (Art. 69 of the Law of Ukraine: On Higher Education as amended on 24.03.2024. № 3482-IX) Letter of the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine №. 111-8681 dated on 15.08.2018: Recommendations for the prevention of academic plagiarism and its detection in scientific works (abstracts, dissertations, monographs, scientific reports, articles, etc.) Elsevier recommendations (https://www.elsevier.com/connect/7-ways-to-avoid-academic-plagiarism).

7 ways to avoid academic plagiarism:

- Never deliberately engage in plagiarism. It's not worth the risk because the chances of getting caught are high and increasing every year as more and more institutions purchase plagiarism detection software.

- Always use quotes and references. It takes a little more effort and time to find accurate quotes and create the right link, but it's very important. There are a lot of available software that simplify preparation and tracking recommendations.

- Paraphrase only when necessary and include references. If possible, use quoted passages and make sure that any match of words with the original is minimal and justified.

- Quote the reference while using facts that can be outside the target audience's knowledge base.

- Copy phrases with extreme caution if you are not a native speaker. Do not use entire sentences from published research papers or even phrases consisting of more than three words, unless these phrases are of a purely technical nature, as in the basic description of statistical results.

- Always thank people for their ideas to avoid the risk of plagiarism of ideas.

Currently, the of artificial intelligence while preparing articles and publications has become relevant. The Editorial and Advisory boards do not object to the use of artificial intelligence by authors in their research and writing. However, it is very important to maintain transparency and accountability in scientific publications. Generative AI and AI-enabled technologies should only be used to improve the readability and language of your research paper. Authors are fully responsible and accountable for the content of their work. Therefore, we are eager to receive notifications from authors that mention artificial intelligence tools. Authors should refrain from using artificial intelligence to make decisions or conclusions.

If use of artificial intelligence is detected without proper notification, the article can be withdrawn. By following these recommendations, authors can ensure the responsible and ethical use of artificial intelligence in their content preserving integrity of their research and building trust in the scientific community.

Simultaneous Posts

The author(s) may not publish a scientific article describing the same research in more than one journal/collection. Submitting a scientific article to more than one journal/collection at the same time is considered unethical behavior and is unacceptable. The author/authors should not submit previously published articles for consideration in other journals/collections. Sometimes the publication of certain types of articles (for example, methodological recommendations for conducting expert research, documenting war crimes of Russia against Ukraine, translations of international documents) in more than one journal is justified, if the relevant requirements are met. The authors and Editorial Board members involved must agree that the secondary publication should reflect the same data and the same interpretation of it as the primary document. The secondary publication should link to the primary publication.

 Confirmation of sources

Bibliography is a list much larger than references. It contains all sources used by the author during preparation of the paper text.

References is reference information, a list of references, during which compilation of transliteration is used. It goes in a block and repeats bibliography in English, regardless of whether there are foreign sources in it or not.

  While research activity, the Author/authors of a research paper are obliged to carry out a scientific search to find original publications on the relevant topic of scientific research and to properly disclose the sources of materials used in his work, if these materials were not obtained by the author himself. Authors should cite publications that have had a fundamental impact on determining nature of the submitted content. Information obtained privately, through private conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties may not be used without the express written permission of the original source. Information obtained when providing/receiving confidential services, such as court documents or grant applications, cannot be used without the written permission of the provider of these services. The author/authors should cite publications properly and clearly indicate the sources of all cited or provided information and issue bibliographic references to the sources used in accordance with established requirements. The author/authors should make references to actually used editions of normative acts taking into account their changeability and placement on relevant resources.

 Manuscript authorship

Authorship should be limited to those individuals who made a significant contribution to the conception, design, performance, or interpretation of the claimed research. They should be listed as co-authors. Co-authors of the edition should be all persons who have made a significant scientific contribution to the submitted research paper and share responsibility for the obtained results. Other contributions should be noted in the notes or in the text of the acknowledgment form. The author who submits a manuscript for publication is responsible for ensuring that list of co-authors includes all and precisely those persons who meet the criteria of authorship. In an article written by several authors, the one of the authors who provides the Editorial Board with contact information, documents and corresponds with the Editorial Board assumes responsibility for the consent of the other article authors for its publication in the collection. The author(s) should ensure that names of all co-authors are listed on the paper and that no non-co-author is attributed to them, that all co-authors have read and approved final version of the research paper.

 Disclosing Information on Potential Conflicts of Interest

Conflict of interests is existence of a person’s private interest in the field where he performs his official or representative powers, that can affect objectivity or impartiality of his decision-making, or performance or non-performance of actions during performance of these powers.

All authors should disclose in their research papers any financial and other significant conflicts of interest that can affect the research results or their interpretation. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of possible conflicts of interest can include: information about the employer, information consultations, shareholder ownership, fees, paid expert testimonies, patent applications/registrations, as well as grants and other types of funding. All potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.

 Main errors in published research papers

  The author/authors are obliged to immediately notify the members of the Editorial Board of the collection and assist them in eliminating or correcting the error if he discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his published work. If the editorial board learns from a third party that published research paper contains significant errors, the Author/Authors shall immediately provide the Editorial Board with evidence of the correctness of the source data of the scientific article, or exercise the right of retraction and correct errors in a certain way.

Retraction is possible ways to make corrections or withdraw published article. According to the COPE guidelines, a retraction is a mechanism for correcting published paper and warning readers that it is so flawed or contains inaccurate data that its conclusions cannot be trusted.

 ETHICAL OBLIGATIONS OF EDITORIAL AND ADVISORY BOARDS

Data archiving policy

The Editorial Board, in case of suspension of the publication of the journal or other force majeure circumstances, carries out electronic backup and preserves access to the full-text versions of the publication in English and Ukrainian on the journal's website, the free repository of the Vernadsky National Library of Ukraine, online databases: Index Copernicus International (Warsaw, Poland) (ICV 2020: 97.40); Worldcat; European Reference Index for the Humanities and the Social Sciences (ERIH PLUS) etc. Read more...

Decision on publication

Editorial Board is responsible for quality of all content published in the collection of scientific papers, for which their selection is carried out, external and internal review of all content submitted for publication is organized. The co-chairs of the Editorial Board may consult with other members of the Editorial and Advisory Board to make appropriate decisions. The Editorial Board reserves the right to reject articles if it considers that research paper does not meet the profile of the collection or the authors have violated formal legal or ethical standards, or to return it for revision. In the latter case, the author/authors are obliged to finalize the article in accordance with the comments of the editorial board.

Fair Play Principle

Editorial Board necessarily evaluates the manuscripts according to their intellectual content, regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship or political views of the author. Decisions of the Board do not depend on commercial or other interests and are based on ensuring fair review.

 Confidentiality

Privacy is a non-disclosure property; trustworthiness, secrecy, pure privacy.

Editorial and Advisory boards have no right to disclose information about submitted articles to anyone other than corresponding author, reviewer, and other editorial consultants. Any manuscript received for publication; review is considered a confidential document.

Members of the Editorial and Advisory boards should not provide any information to third parties regarding  content of the manuscript under consideration (except for persons participating in professional manuscript evaluation), except in cases of announcing publications. If the members of the Editorial or Advisory Board are presented with convincing evidence that main content or conclusions of research paper previously published in the research paper collection are erroneous; the Editorial Board is obliged to publish a corresponding notice indicating falsity of the content or conclusions and if the publication has not yet been published, correct errors.

 Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished content used in the submitted research paper cannot be used in the Editorial Board members' own researches. Information or ideas obtained during peer review should remain confidential and not be used for personal gain by the Editorial or Advisory board. Members of Editorial or Advisory Board should recuse themselves and ask another colleague to review the manuscript instead of them) for reviewing a manuscript in connection with which he has a conflict of interest as a result of competitive relations, cooperation or other relations and connections with one of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions associated with submitted manuscripts. Editorial Board Co-chairs should require all participants in the procedure to disclose relevant competing interests and publications if a conflict of interest has been identified after publication. Other appropriate action, such as a retraction or apology will be taken if necessary.

 Participation and cooperation in the investigation

 While submitting an ethical complaint about submitted manuscript or published scientific article (exclusively through the mail of the journal);  Co-chairs of the Editorial Board should take reasonable appropriate measures. Such measures usually include contact with the author of the manuscript/scientific article and proper consideration of the relevant complaint or claim. If necessary, it can be necessary to contact relevant institutions or research organizations. If the complaint is upheld, appropriate corrections, retractions, or apologies should be published. Each report of unethical behavior must be reviewed.

REVIEWERS’ ETHICAL OBLIGATIONS

Editorial Board with Advisory Board participation has the right to review (anonymized peer review), edit, shorten and reject articles.

Peer review of a scientific article is an essential stage while preparing editions for printing. Editorial Board members with participation of Advisory Board are obliged to perform a certain amount of work on appropriate review of a scientific article. All scientific articles submitted for publication should be peer-reviewed by Academic Supervisor or consultant of the author(s), evaluated by scientific institution where the work was performed. Peer review helps the Co-chair of the Editorial Board in making editorial decisions through cooperation of the Editorial Board and the author and can help the author improve his work.

All members of the Advisory Board conduct internal reviews of scientific articles. Since National Scientific Center «Hon. Prof. M. S. Bokarius Forensic Science Institute» is Ukrainian leading scientific institution in the field of forensic science, members of Scientific Advisory and Methodological Council on Forensic Science Issues at the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, who hold a PhD or higher degree are involved in internal review.

External peer review is carried out by leading experts and scientists in the field of criminalistics and forensic science in Ukraine and other countries who have experience in publishing articles in relevant international publications and extensive professional experience in assessing the quality of scientific periodicals. The peer review process is described here: https://www.oecd.org/tax/transparency/documents/handbook-for-peer-reviews-on-transparency-and-exchange-of-information-on-request.pdf .

Basic principles to be followed by reviewers:

Reviewer objectively assesses quality of the submitted manuscript and determines its compliance with scientific, literary and ethical standards. The reviewer should be impartial.

Peer review aims to help the author improve the article quality and the Editor-in-Chief to make a decision about publication.

The reviewer cannot be a co-author of the article submitted for review.

Reviewer objectively assesses quality of the submitted manuscript and determines its compliance with scientific, literary and ethical standards. The reviewer should be impartial.

Reviewers should agree to review only those manuscripts for which they have necessary expertise. A reviewer who does not consider himself an expert in the topic of the article or knows that he will not be able to review the article in time should inform the Editor-In-Chief about this and refuse to review.

The reviewer should respect confidentiality of the review and not disclose any details of the manuscript or its content during or after review procedure, except for those published in the journal; not use the information obtained during the review procedure for their own or other purposes in favor of a person or institution or  disadvantage or discredit others

The reviewer is obliged to declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the Editorial Board, not to allow his reviews to depend on the manuscript origin, nationality, religious or political beliefs, article or other signs of the authors or commercial considerations; to be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from hostility or incitement, as well as from defamatory or humiliating personal comments.

The reviewer should identify previously published research papers that are relevant to peer-reviewed article and are not cited by the author. Any statement in the review that some observations, conclusions or arguments from the peer-reviewed article have already been found in the literature should be accompanied by an accurate reference to the information source.

Peer review is largely a mutual effort and commit to doing their fair share of reviewing and providing the Board with personal and professional information that is an accurate and true representation of their experience in a timely manner. The reviewer should provide an objective opinion on sufficiency of citing the existing literature on this issue; recognize that impersonating another person during verification procedure is considered a serious misconduct (https://publicationethics.org/files/Peer%20review%20guidelines.pdf)

Any reviewer selected to evaluate a paper who believes that his or her qualifications are insufficient to review the research presented in the paper or knows that speed of its review will be too slow should notify the editor and refuse to participate in the review procedure.

 Confidentiality

The reviewer should respect intellectual independence of the authors and treat the manuscript sent for review as a confidential document.

 Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments or interpretations contained in this scientific article, unless the author agrees. The reviewer should not evaluate a manuscript with whose author or co-author he has a personal or professional relationship, if such a relationship can affect judgment about the manuscript.

 Objectivity standards

Reviewers should adequately explain and justify their judgments so that authors and editors can understand the basis for their comments. Any statement that an observation, conclusion, or argument has been previously published should be accompanied by an appropriate reference.

If the review contains recommendations for article revision, the Editorial Board, together with the Advisory Board of the collection, sends the author the review text  with a proposal to take them into account while preparing a new version of the article or to refute them with arguments. The article revised by the author is resubmitted for review.

Editorial Board members with participation of the Advisory Board may decide to involve one or more reviewers whose participation is disputed by the authors, if the opinions of these reviewers are important for  impartial manuscript review. Such a decision can be made, for example, if there are serious contradictions between the manuscript submitted for publication and previous work of a potential reviewer.

In case of unresolved contradictions regarding manuscript article, the Editorial Board may send the manuscript for additional review.

Original reviews are kept for 3 years.

 Confirmation of sources

The reviewer should note any cases of insufficient citation by the authors of research papers of other scientists that are directly related to the paper under review; it should bring to the editor's attention any significant similarity between the submitted manuscript and any published article.

 ETHICAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE COLLECTION READERS AND OTHER USERS OF INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE COLLECTION

In accordance with international copyright law, the content of the collection website cannot be reproduced in whole or in part in any form (electronic or printed) without the prior written consent of the authors (or, in the event of their death, permission of the collection Board). While using published content in the context of other documents, a link to the original source of the publication is required. It is allowed to distribute any articles from the collection or excerpts from them via electronic networks, but in such distribution, a link to the original source is required. It is prohibited to publish and/or distribute the collection content by third parties or organizations on paper and hard electronic media.

Claims regarding illegal publications without  permission of the authors (or in the case of their death without permission the collection Board) can be submitted by each author or NSC « Hon.  Prof. M. S. Bokarius FSI»

Website users are readers of the collection, authors can send their comments, questions regarding publications in the collection, etc. by mail to the Editorial Board address while observing the generally recognized norms of ethics. NSC « Hon.  Prof. M. S. Bokarius FSI» has to ensure processing and publication of such content and to contribute to delivery of relevant information to the authors of these publications.