Editorial Ethics Policy

The “PHILOLOGY AND CULTURE” editorial board (hereinafter – editorial board) is responsible for maintaining its scientific reputation. Our journal publishes research papers, and we strongly believe that scientific credibility is our indispensable asset.  The editorial staff members are guided in their work by the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics, and take into account the valuable experience of reputable international journals and publishers.

The editorial board of the “PHILOLOGY AND CULTURE” (hereinafter –the journal) makes every effort to comply with the ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community  to prevent any violations of these rules. This policy is a prerequisite for our effective participation in the development of an integrated system of knowledge.

Duties of Authors

Requirements for publication of research results. The authors of papers, containing the results of original research, are required to submit a detailed report on the work done, as well as objective arguments in favor of its relevance. The article should include accurate data confirming the results obtained. The article should contain details and references necessary for confirmation of the work done. False representation of the facts is considered to be a violation of the code of ethics and is unacceptable. Reviews and professional articles should be objective and contain valid information. Papers, expressing    "opinion of the editorial board" should be marked accordingly.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors of submitted papers should ensure that they have written entirely original work, and if the authors have used the work and / or words of other authors, it should be clearly identified by references or in the text.

Plagiarism takes many forms: from presenting someone else’s  work for one’s own to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's work (without reference to the source), as well as claiming the rights to the results obtained in the studies carried out by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable in publications.

Submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

Authors should not submit for publication a previously published article.

The works of other researchers should be clearly identified. Authors should provide references to publications that have influenced the content of the submitted paper.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those individuals who have made significant contributions to the conception, planning, implementation or interpretation of the submitted research.

All those who have made significant contributions to the research should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged, or included in the list of contributors.

The author should list all appropriate co-authors and ensure that no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved  the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

The article, if accepted for publication, is placed in the public domain, copyright reserved by the authors.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors should disclose any financial or other significant conflicts of interest that might be construed as affecting the results of the evaluation of the manuscript. Examples of possible conflicts of interest, subject to mandatory indication are: employment, advisory services, stock ownership, fee-paid expertise, patents, grants and other funding. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the Editor- in- Chief learns from a third party that the published work contains a significant error, it is the author’s obligation to promptly retract or correct the article, or present  the evidence that the published work is correct.


The editorial board commits itself to help the scientific community in implementation of publishing ethics, especially in cases of suspected duplicate article submission or plagiarism.

Duties of the Editor-in-Chief

These instructions correspond to the editorial policies and standards of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors).

Acceptance for Publication

The Editor-in Chief is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The decision is made basing on the credibility of the paper and its relevance for the readers.

The Editor- in- Chief may be guided by the methodological guidance developed by the editorial board and legal requirements such as the avoidance of libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

Also, in making this decision, the Editor- in- Chief may confer with other editors, members of the editorial board or the reviewers (or representatives of scientific and teaching staff).

Fair Play

The Editor-in- Chief evaluates the submitted papers for their intellectual content, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, nationality or political philosophy of the authors.


The Editor-in- Chief and any editorial staff member  must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

  • Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the written consent of the author.
  • Confidential information, obtained in the review process, must not be disclosed or used for personal gain.
  • The Editor- in -Chief, will waive the examination of the submitted paper in the presence of a conflict of interest arising out of competition, collaboration, or other kind of relationship with authors and organizations involved in this work (the editor can take over as the Editor-in- Chief).
  • The Editor- in- Chief shall require all authors to provide information about the conflict of interests and publish corrections, if any show up after the publication of the paper. If necessary, more suitable actions can be performed, such as publishing a refutation or expressions of concern.
  • The Editor-in- Chief should ensure the appropriateness of reviewing procedures  with regard to the submitted articles.
  • Unrefereed sections of the scientific journal should be clearly identified as such.

Ethics Related Complaints

The Editor- in- Chief should be reasonably quick in response to ethics related complaints concerning the submitted manuscript or published article, having contact with the members of the editorial board. The measures typically include notifying the author of the complaint and its consideration and, if necessary, further communication with relevant institutions and research organizations. In the case of confirmation of the validity of the complaint, the correction, retraction or other appropriate statement is published. Each ethics related complaint will be considered, even a few years after the publication.

Citation of the Journal

The Editor-in- Chief or executive editor under no circumstances should force the authors to quote one of the scientific journals published by K (V) FU, as a necessary condition for the acceptance of the manuscript for publication. Any recommendations for citing a work should be based on its scientific merit and aim to improve the material presented. Members of the editorial board may recommend authors certain sources in the course of reviewing, but such recommendations cannot be reduced to the demand to quote one of scientific journals published by K (V) FU .

Duties of Reviewers

Every paper is reviewed by a minimum of two experts, who have all the opportunity to make an impartial evaluation regarding the level and clarity of the material presented, its relevance to the subject remit of the journal, novelty and reliability of results.

A reviewer should

1.Test the paper for the appropriate subject scope.

2. Evaluate the scientific validity of the paper, and its topical importance.

3. Evaluate the scientific timeliness of the results of the research.

4. Specify the layout of the paper, the length of the paper on the whole, abstracts in Russian and English, a list of literature and references to it in the text, contact information about the authors and others.

5. Give a qualitative and / or quantitative evaluation of the material in the paper

– factual;

– illustrative.

6. Evaluate the completeness and accuracy of the data presented.

7. Evaluate the accuracy of the used definitions and wordings.

8. Evaluate the literary style of presentation.

9. Provide well-grounded conclusions about the article as a whole, the comments and, if necessary , recommendations how  it could be improved.

Participation in Making Decisions about Publication

Reviewing procedure assists the editor in making editorial decisions about publication, if necessary, the Editor-in-Chief can communicate with the author. Peer review is an integral part of academic communication and a scientific basis of the method used in the journal. The editorial board shares the view of the scientific community that the researchers willing to publish their articles in the journals, published by K (V) FU, must participate in peer reviewing.


Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except persons authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the author. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the written consent of the author. Confidential information, obtained in the review process, must not be disclosed or used for personal gain. The reviewer should waive the examination of the submitted paper in the presence of a conflict of interest arising out of competition, collaboration, or other kind of relationship with authors and organizations involved in this work.