Ethical norms

Ethics guidelines of the Editorial Board of
“Galician Studies: Law Sciences”

 General provisions

Ethics guidelines of the editorial board are based on the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics, International standards for editors and authors, and Ethical Code of Ukrainian Researcher.

The editorial board considers the monitoring of ethics of the manuscripts as one of the aspects of its activities and the peer-review process.

Editors don’t approve the materials which contain insulting statements, manifestations of aggression or any discrimination, or incite ethnic and racial hatred, violate international legal norms and current legislation of Ukraine.

Editors are not responsible for opinions, judgments, results and conclusions made by the authors of articles and published in the journal. They do not represent the point of view of the editorial board.

Editors are not liable to the authors and/or third parties and organizations for possible damage caused by the publication of the article.

The authors are responsible for the originality or any unfair use of the intellectual property of other authors, as well as for the reliability of information, the accuracy of names, surnames, etc.

Editors reserve the right to review the above ethical principles to amend them.

Ethical guidelines for editors

▶ editors take responsibility for everything they publish and thus, all submitted materials are subject to careful selection and peer review. Editors reserve the right to reject an article or send back for improving;

▶ editors should make fair and unbiased decisions independent from commercial consideration and ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process within a reasonable time;

▶ editors are entitled to reject a manuscript without peer-reviewing if it doesn’t meet the editorial policy, ethics and requirements for manuscripts;

▶ editors shall not provide information related to the content of a manuscript under consideration to other persons, except ones involved in the professional evaluation of this manuscript;

▶ editors are authorized to withdraw the electronic version of the article published in the printed version of the journal, if someone’s rights or generally accepted rules of scientific ethics are violated. The editors inform the author who provided the article and the organization where the work was performed about the fact of withdrawal of the article. Editors also publish a notice of the fact of withdrawal of the article in the next issue of the journal;

▶ editors allow distributing any articles or extracts from the journal in electronic social networks, but reference to the original source is mandatory. The third parties or organizations are prohibited to publish and / or distribute the journal materials in paper form and data storage devices.

Ethical guidelines for authors

▶ the research being reported should have been conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and should comply with all relevant legislation. Authors should mention dangerous manifestations and risks associated with the research;

▶ researchers should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation.

▶ researchers should adhere to publication requirements that submitted work is original, is not plagiarised, and has not been published elsewhere;

▶ a manuscript can involve scientifically grounded criticism of a paper of another researcher. The personal comments are not regarded as relevant;

▶ funding sources and relevant conflicts of interest should be disclosed. Authors should guarantee a lack of the contractual relations or
property considerations, which could influence the publication of information contained in a manuscript;

▶ authors should indicate the sources of cited information, which should be properly acknowledged and referenced.

Ethical guidelines for peer-reviews

▶ if an appointed peer-reviewer is not confident that his qualification meets the level of research, he/she should give the manuscript back immediately;

▶ a reviewer should be impartial when evaluating a manuscript, its experimental and theoretical parts, interpretation and statement, as well as take into account the correspondence of the research compliance with the high scientific and literature standards. The reviewer should respect the intellectual independence of authors.

▶ a reviewer should take into account a possibility of the conflict of interests if a particular manuscript closely relates to the reviewer’s current or published paper. If there are doubts, the reviewer should refuse to review the manuscripts referring to the conflict of interests;

▶ a reviewer should assess a manuscript if he/she has personal or professional relations and if such relations can influence the impartiality;

▶ a reviewer shouldn’t show a manuscript under review others or discuss it with colleagues, only if the reviewer needs professional advice;

▶ reviewers should adequately explain and justify their judgments so that editors and authors can understand the reasons their comments are based on;

▶ a reviewer should indicate any cases of a lack of citations of the papers of other scholars, any significant similarity between the relevant manuscript and any published article or any manuscript simultaneously submitted to another journal;

▶ a reviewer should provide a review without undue delay;

▶ reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations contained in the manuscript without the consent of the author.