Ethical norms
The editorial and publishing ethics of the collection “Visnyk of the Lviv University. Series Geology” is based on:
- Code of Ethics of the scientist of Ukraine;
- recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE);
- universal moral norms, which are common to different social groups, in their application in the scientific and editorial process in order to comply with ethical norms in regulating relations between the main participants in this process – Authors, Editorial Board, Editors, Reviewers.
Ethical Obligations of Editors
The editor should consider all manuscripts offered for publication without prejudice, evaluating each on its merits without regard to race, religion, nationality, status, or institutional affiliation of the authors.
Is not allowed to publish the information if there is sufficient reason to believe that it is plagiarism.
All submitted materials are carefully selected and two-way “blind” reviewed. An editorial board reserves the right to reject a paper or return it for required improvement. The author is obliged to improve the paper according to the remarks of the reviewers or the editorial board.
Rejected papers are not re-reviewed.
The editor and editorial board members should not hand over any information related to the content of the submitted manuscript to other persons, than those who are participating in professional evaluation of this manuscript. After a positive decision regarding the manuscript, it should be published in the journal and in the website of the journal.
If there are any conflicts of interest (financial, academic, personal) all participants of review process must inform the editorial board. All disputes are considered at a meeting of the editorial board.
Ethical Obligations of Authors
The authors should ensure that they have written absolutely original papers, and if the authors have used the work or words of others, it was duly executed as links or citations in quotation marks. The editorial board reviews the articles on plagiarism.
Submission of identical paper in more than one journal is considered as unethical behaviour and is unacceptable.
A paper must be well structured, contain enough references and be designed according to the requirements.
Unfair or known inaccurate assertions in the paper represent the unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
The author, making correspondence with the editors, has to guarantee that all co-authors have read and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its publication.
In case of disagreement with the reviewer’s guidelines, authors give to the editor board a comprehensive answer for reviewer.
Authors have opportunity to respond to criticisms of papers.
Authors are wholly responsible for the content of papers and for the fact of their.
The author does not have the right to reproducing the article in other editions without the consent of the editorial staff.
If someone uses material from an article – should make a link to the article by the author.
Ethical Obligations of Reviewers of Manuscripts
To ensure the objectivity of evaluation of manuscripts the editor board follows the two-way “blind” review.
A reviewer should judge objectively the quality of the manuscript, its experimental and theoretical work, its interpretations and its exposition. Additionally the reviewer should evaluate how the paper corresponds to the high scientific and literary standards. A reviewer should respect the intellectual independence of the authors.
A reviewer should treat a manuscript sent for review as a confidential document. It should neither be shown nor discussed with others persons except in special cases, when the reviewer needs someone’s specific consultation.
Reviewers should explain and support their judgments adequately so that editors and authors may understand the basis of their comments. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation or reference.
A reviewer should call to the editor’s attention to any substantial similarity between the reviewed manuscript and any published paper or any manuscript submitted concurrently to another journal.
A reviewer should act promptly, submitting a report in a timely manner.
