ETHICAL PRINCIPLES OF PUBLICATION

Ethical principles of the Editorial Board

- The Editorial Board of the journal “Population” (Narodonaselenie) operates according to Chapter 70 “Copyright” of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, ethical principles set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) ( http://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct ), as well as generally accepted ethical principles of scientific publications. Infringement of copyright and moral norms is unacceptable from an ethical point of view, it can hinder development of scientific knowledge, and undermine the authority of social sciences.

- The Editorial Board should be accountable for the published materials: the editors strive to meet the scientific needs of both readers and authors; constantly improve their journal; assure the quality of the published materials, champion authors’ freedom of expression; rule out satisfaction of financial or other pragmatic needs to the detriment of the intellectual and ethical standards; always willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.

- The Editorial Board assumes that all authors and reviewers are familiar with the requirements to them.

- The Editorial Board takes decision to publish or reject articles based exclusively on the professional level and quality of the submitted manuscripts with no regard to race, sex, nationality, citizenship, religious, ideological or political views of the authors.

- The Editorial Board taking decision on publication of an article is guided by authenticity of the data, scientific significance and scientific novelty of the submitted work.

- The Editorial Board ensures that there is no conflict of interests between the authors and the reviewers. The reviewers cannot be co-authors of the articles under review, scientific or administrative supervisors of the authors, or subordinates to the authors.

- The Editorial Board discontinues preparation of the manuscript for publication upon the detection of publication ethics violation, plagiarism, submission to the journal of already published materials, misappropriation of research results of other persons, falsification of data.

- The Editorial Board does not use the submitted manuscripts and not pass them to the third parties (excluding reviewers and Editorial Board members) prior to publication.

- All substantive corrections in the text are agreed upon with the author. In case of disagreement over the corrections both parties have the right to refuse to publish the article.

- The materials published in the journal may not reflect the point of view of the publisher, founder, Editorial Council, Editorial Board and editorial team.

Ethical principles of the author

- The authors do not submit for publication in the journal previously published articles and materials offered to other journals.

- The authors should indicate all persons whose research results were used in the manuscript. The persons, who did not participate in the research, should not be indicated as co-authors.

- The authors present results of an original scientific study. Bibliographic references should be given for all scientific works having impacted to some extent the course of research.

- All borrowed content is given according to rules of citing with reference to author and source. Unformed citations and assignment of rights to the results of other people's research are unacceptable.

- The authors of the submitted manuscripts should use reliable results of conducted studies. The use and disclosing obviously incorrect data is unacceptable.

- The copyright of the graphic material in manuscripts belongs to the manuscripts’ authors; if the material was prepared by the authors on the basis of literature data, there should be given comprehensive bibliographic references.

- The authors attach to the articles their personal data (place of work with its address, position, e-mail, ORCID) that are permitted for publication in the journal.

- The authors agree that their article will be sent for review (the reviewer’s name is not disclosed) and undertake to collaborate with editors to improve, reduce or supplement their articles with the account of the reviewers’ comments, as well as to correct all inaccuracies.

- In case of finding errors or inaccuracies in the articles that are under consideration or have been already published, the authors should notify the editors as soon as possible.

- The author does not claim a fee for the published article.

- Violation of the ethical principles by the author results in refusal to publish the manuscript.

Ethical principles of the reviewer

- Reviewers are experts in the subdisciplines, to which the manuscripts under review belong.

- Reviewer cannot be a member of an established research team, which included the authors of the reviewed manuscript, as well as a scientific consultant of any of the authors.

- Reviewed manuscripts are confidential documents. They cannot be shown to or discussed with other persons. Reviewer must not use information on the content of manuscript before its publication in his own interests. In case of conflict of interests of authors and reviewers, the Editorial Board should be informed about it immediately.

- The reviewer, who finds himself not sufficiently qualified or objective to assess the manuscript, must inform the Editorial Board and ask them to exclude him from the process of reviewing the submitted manuscript.

- The reviewer must give an objective and reasoned assessment to the presented research results. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

- The reviewer should provide an objective and comprehensive analysis of its scientific and methodological merits and flaws.

- The review should contain assessment of the compliance of the submitted manuscript with the requirements of the journal on the subject and size, as well as scientific novelty, substantiation of the obtained results, language accuracy, logicality and clarity of the material, representativeness of bibliography

- The result of reviewing the manuscript is conclusion about the possibility of its publication: a) in the presented form; b) after revision; c) or its rejection. This conclusion is approved by the Editorial Boars of the journal.

- The result of review is sent to the author with indication of the required improvements, if necessary, and the deadline for their completion.