The Editorial Board of the Issue “Ukrainian Journal of Information Technolo-gies” is published by the National University “Lviv Polytechnic” in the selection and admission of Manuscripts of Articles is guided by the following documents:
- The Code of Ethics of Scientific Publications of Non-Profit Partnership “The Committee on the Ethics of Scientific Publications” (Committee of Publication Ethics, COPE);
- The Rules of Ethics of Scientific Publications (Publishing Ethics Resource Kit), recommended by the publishing house “Elsevier” (Ethics & Research in Publication);
- The Document of the Western Scientific Center of NAS of Ukraine and MES of Ukraine “The Code of Ethics of the Scientist of Ukraine”;
- Legal Journal “Law of Ukraine”, the article “Ethics of publications and pre-vention on unfair practice of publications”;
For the Editorial Board of the Journal is important to agree the Standards of Ethical behavior for all parties involved in the preparation of manuscript before its publiccation: the author(s), editorial staff, reviewers, publishers and the scientific community in general.
The ethical standards that should guide stakeholders involved un preparing the manuscript for publication in one of the areas of research of Journal which are specified by State Registration Certificate are presented below:
Ethical obligations of Editorial Board
1. The Editor should consider all manuscripts of articles submitted for public-cation without prejudice, assessing each properly despite race, religion, nationality and job position of the author(s).
2. The Editors could prevent further consideration of manuscript paper, if the editor has the sufficient reason to believe that there is a significant amount of plagiarism or autoplagiarism.
3. All the materials, submitted for publication are carefully selected and reviewed. The editor may reject the article or return it for revision in case of non-compliance on the structure or improper design. The author shall finalize the Manu-script of the Article due to the comments of the editor or the reviewers.
4. The overrided article should not be re-examined and should not reviewed.
5. The decision of the Editor about the taken a manuscript for publication is based on its characteristics such as the importance of results, originality of ideas or innovation research, the quality of the material and matching the profile of the Journal. The Editor can reject the manuscript without review if he believes that it does not meet the Journals profile. In the process of making this decision the Editor may consult with members of the Editorial board or Reviewers.
6. The Editor and members of the Editorial board of the Journal should not give others any information related to the content of manuscript that is under consideration, other than those directly involved in the professional assessment of the manuscript. After the positive decision made by the Editor, the Editorial Stuff prepare the Article for publication in the Journal and place all the necessary materials on the Web-pages of the Journal, the University and its publishing and saving at appropriate electronic resources.
7. The Editors will be extremely concerned if a third party without permission of the publisher will publish or distribute the Materials of the Journal on paper and electronic media. The Editors reserve the rights to perform further actions within existing legislation. If a third party use the published materials of the Journal in the context of other documents it is required to carry links to their source.
8. The Responsibilities and Rights of the Journal Editor regarding any submitted manuscript to the editor for publication, authored by the Editor himself, should be delegated to any other editor, not involved in this article.
9. Unpublished materials presented in the manuscript paper, but for some reason removed by the Editor with inform of the Author of the Article can not used by any Editor or other Members of the Editorial Board for their own research without the written consent of the author. The author must disclose any conflicts of interests and publish corrections if a conflict of interest was discovered after publication. The editor should quickly settle the issue of conflict of interest the articles author, reviewers and members of the editorial board.
10. If there is any conflict of interests (financial, academic, personal) all stakeholders of the process of reviewing manuscript should notify the Chief Editor or Deputy Chief Editor. All disputes should be considered at a meeting of the Editorial Board in the presence of all parties to the conflict of interest.
11. The Chief Editor must willing to consider a convincing criticism of shortcomings in articles published in journals, even not leading specialists only, but in the respective areas of expertise.
12. Approved for publication articles are placed in the open access online site of the Journal. The Copyright reserved by the authors of the publication.
13. For the Editors of the Journal the thought of the Authors, its Readers, Reviewers and Editorial Board members about how to improve the layout of the Journal or some features of its publication.
Ethical obligations of Authors
1. Author (s) manuscript should ensure that they have written entirely original article, and if it is used in the work material from other publications, than it was properly executed as links or relevant citations. The Editorials fulfill the versions of Articles for plagiarism autoplagiarism.
2. Submission of identical articles in more than one publication the Editors regard as Unethical Behaviour, which is unacceptable for further cooperation. As the Ethical Behaviour should be understood as a set of actions or actions of people who meet the Standards of Morality, Conscience, Order, formed in Society, or to which it is directed. Everything else considered as Unethical Behavior.
3. The Authorship of the Article should be limited to those of its Authors who have made a significant contribution to the study claimed, but not more than the number of Authors, which the Editors installed.
4. The number and any other data in the manuscript should be submitted with no mistakes. Under the Correctness of data should be understood the data with no hidden or random errors. Random errors in data due, usually to inadvertently distorting the human or technical failures agents in the processing of data by the information system. However, as true data should be understood the data, which meaning is impossible to challenge or deny.
5. The article should be structured to contain enough references to the sources used and prepared according to the requirements of the Editorial Board of Journal.
6. Fraud or knowingly inaccurate statements or any data in the manuscript Editors regarded as Unethical Behaviour and are unacceptable for further cooperation.
7. Authorized Author who has edited a correspondence should ensure that all co-authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its publication.
8. The Author(s) of manuscript in the case of disagreement with the guidelines of the reviewer(s) may submit to the Editorial Board writing his explanatory answer.
9. To the author(s) of the manuscript is given the opportunity at a Meeting of the Editorial Board to answer some reviewers criticized points in the article or in the entire article in general.
10. The Author(s) of manuscript is personally responsible for the content of the material presented in the article and the publication itself. The Editorial Staff is not liable to any publication before the Author or to third parties for any damages caused by the publication of the Article. The Editorial Board has the right to remove Articles from the Journal even on the final stage of its preparation for publication if it turns out that during its preparation for the publication were violated the rights of third parties or generally accepted standards of Scientific Ethics. The fact of withdrawal of Article from the current edition of the Journal is explained by the Editorial Board to the Author in written form.
11. The Author has not the wrights to retype fully material which is presented in the Article in other publications without the consent of the Editors. If a third party borrows material from the Article to their needs, it should make reference to the article Author(s).
12. The volume of the Journal Issue is a limited resource, so the Authors of the articles must use it wisely and sparingly.
Ethical obligations of Reviewers
1. To ensure objective evaluation of manuscripts of Articles the Journal holds dual "blind" review.
2. While reviewing manuscripts of Articles is a key step in preparing them for publication, then, a priori, to implement the Scientific Method itself every Scientist must properly do their share of work, including the reviewing.
3. If the selected Reviewer is not sure that his qualification meets the research topics proposed in manuscript or proper training, it must immediately return the manuscript of an article in the Journal.
4. A Reviewer should objectively assess the quality of the manuscript given in the experimental and theoretical part, the results and interpretation of the material and consider how the work meets high scientific and literary standards. Reviewer should respect the Intellectual Independence of Authors and Delivery or presentation of the material in the manuscript if they do not clash the style of the Articles in the Journal.
5. A Reviewer should consider the possibility of conflicts of interest in cases where the manuscript is now closely linked to the current published works of reviewer. If there is some doubt, the reviewer should immediately return the manuscript of an article in the Journal without a review, pointing to a possible conflict of interests.
6. A Reviewer should treat Manuscript, sent it for review as a confidential document. He should not show Manuscript to others or discuss its content with colleagues except in special cases where the reviewer needs someone professional advice.
7. A Reviewer must adequately explain and argue his opinions to the Editor and Author of the manuscript in such way they could understand which his observations are based on. Any statements that observation, conclusion or argument was previously published should be accompanied by appropriate reference to the appropriate source and a page that shows these arguments.
8. The Reviewer should observe any cases of under-quoting by the Author relevant work of other scientists if they relate directly to the subject of study.
9. A Reviewer should pay attention to the Editor if any substantial similarity between this manuscript and any published paper or any manuscript submitted simultaneously to another journal is found.
10. A Reviewer shall provide feedback as Review to the Editor, or in advance inform the inability to perform suitable work.
11. Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information or arguments presented or their interpretation contained in the peer-reviewed Manuscript, if there is no consent of the Author.