Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The journal "Ukrainian Culture: Past, Present, Ways of Development" adheres to Publication Ethics and does not support publication malpractice, based on COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, to ensure high ethical standards and the proper quality of publications.

Rivne State University of the Humanities (RSUH) serves as the publisher of "Ukrainian Culture: Past, Present, Ways of Development." The Editorial Board adheres to this approach at all stages of the publication process and recognizes the associated responsibilities. Advertising materials, reprints, or any commercial profits do not influence editorial decisions.

All participants in the publication process—authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher—are expected to strictly adhere to ethical norms and standards of conduct.

Duties of the Editor and Editorial Board

Publication Decisions

1. General Principles The Editorial Board opposes any form of citation manipulation. Citations must be based solely on scientific relevance and importance to the research topic. Adding references to artificially inflate metrics (an author's h-index or the journal's impact factor) is a gross violation of publication ethics.

The Editorial Board makes decisions regarding the publication of submitted articles. It is guided by the journal's policy and based solely on academic merit and reviewers' conclusions. The Board adheres to current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. It has the right to make decisions in consultation with reviewers or members of the Editorial Board.

The Editor may not use unpublished information in their own research without the written consent of the author. Editors must take measures when ethical complaints arise regarding a submitted manuscript or a published article. The Editor evaluates manuscripts regardless of the author's prior merits, race, ethnicity, gender, religion, citizenship, sexual orientation, or political views.

2. Citation Manipulation According to COPE standards, manipulation includes:

  • Coercive Citation: Editors or reviewers requiring authors to add links to specific articles from the same journal or the editors' own works without scientific justification.

  • Citation Stacking: Agreements between groups of authors or journals for mutual citation to artificially increase metrics.

  • Excessive Self-citation: Unjustified references by authors to their own previous works that are not directly relevant to the new results.

3. Regulations and Restrictions To ensure objectivity, the Editorial Board establishes the following rules:

  • Author Self-citation Level: The recommended volume of references to one’s own works should not exceed 10–15% of the total reference list (unless justified by the specific nature of the topic, e.g., a long-term cycle of experiments).

  • Journal Citation: The Board does not require mandatory citation of articles from RSUH collections. References to the publication are welcome only when substantively necessary.

  • Reviewer Verification: Reviewers are obliged to pay attention to the list of references. If "ballast" references are detected, the reviewer must recommend their removal.

4. Measures in Case of Detected Manipulation If signs of systematic citation manipulation are detected during review or after publication, the Board:

  • Sends a request to the author to justify the relevance of the sources.

  • Rejects the manuscript if the fact of manipulation is confirmed.

  • Reserves the right to retract an already published article if manipulation is discovered later.

Confidentiality

The Editor and the Editorial Board do not disclose information about submitted manuscripts (except to authors and reviewers). Information or ideas obtained during the review process remain confidential and may not be used for personal gain.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts may not be used in any research by the editor, reviewer, or any other informed person without the written consent of the authors. If any conflicts of interest arise from competitive or collaborative relationships with authors/institutions, the editor and any member of the editorial board must recuse themselves from considering the manuscript. In the event that competing interests are discovered after publication, corrections or, if necessary, a retraction or expression of concern must be published.

Integrity Assurance: Engagement and Cooperation

"Ukrainian Culture: Past, Present, Ways of Development" will respond to all claims or concerns regarding research or publication misconduct raised by readers, reviewers, or others. The Editorial Board, involving relevant experts, will assess cases of potential plagiarism or duplicate/redundant publication.

If concerns are serious and the published work may affect scientific knowledge, the journal may issue an "expression of concern" or proceed with a retraction if serious misconduct is confirmed. Retracted articles will be clearly labeled and preserved online for the benefit of readers.

Any person may report suspected unethical behavior to the Editorial Board at any time. The Editor-in-Chief, after consultation with the Editorial Board, decides whether to initiate a potential retraction process. Evidence is treated as strictly confidential. Authors are always given the opportunity to respond to any allegations.

  • Minor violations: Handled directly with the participants; a warning letter is sent.

  • Serious violations: May result in an official editorial notice describing the misconduct, informing the author's employer, a ban on future submissions, or formal retraction of the publication.

The Board acts in accordance with the COPE Best Practice Guidelines (Flowcharts) and Retraction Guidelines.

Duties of Reviewers

  • Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review is a mandatory step in the decision-making process and assists in improving the article.

  • Promptness: If a reviewer feels unqualified or cannot meet the deadline, they must notify the editor and decline the review.

  • Confidentiality: Manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents.

  • Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

  • Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.

  • Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must recuse themselves if a conflict of interest exists. Reviewer misconduct (e.g., plagiarism or delaying review for competitive advantage) is taken seriously and may be reported to the institutional level.

Duties of Authors

  • Reporting Standards: Authors must present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements are unacceptable.

  • Data Access and Retention: Authors may be asked to provide raw data for editorial review and should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

  • Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure the work is entirely original, not plagiarized, and has not been published elsewhere in any language.

  • Multiple or Concurrent Publication: Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is unethical and unacceptable.

  • Authorship of the Manuscript: Authorship should be limited to those who made a significant contribution. The corresponding author ensures all co-authors have approved the final version. No changes to authorship are permitted after acceptance.

  • Fundamental Errors: If an author discovers a significant error in their published work, they must immediately notify the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Disclaimer

The Editorial Board is not responsible for the views, opinions, or content of materials submitted by authors. Full responsibility for the originality of the text, proofreading, and any errors lies solely with the authors. All manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer review process.

References