The review procedure includes all articles submitted to the editorial office. The tasks of the review are to facilitate the strict selection of author's manuscripts for publication and make specific recommendations for their improvement. The review procedure is aimed at the most objective assessment of the content of a scientific article, determining its compliance with the requirements of the collection of scientific papers and assumes a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the article's materials.
The main principle of selection of publications presented in the collection of scientific papers "Bulletin of the National University of Civil Protection of Ukraine. Series: Public Administration" - the availability of their professional evaluation. In order to be confident in assessing the quality of the article, the process of its evaluation is methodical and impartial.
Scientific articles submitted to the editorial board and meeting the formal criteria are considered on the subject compliance with the subject matter of the publication and the definition of the range of reviewers. Reviewing materials that are relevant to the subject matter of the publication is completely anonymous for the author and reviewer, the procedure is carried out by two independent reviewers (the process of double "blind" review - Double-blind peer review policy).
The review team may include members of the editorial board and external experts who determine the vector of development of scientific thought and have publications in the relevant subject areas.
The reviewer evaluates:
- sufficiency of disclosure of the relevance of the article;
- substantiation of the connection of the problem posed in the article with important scientific or practical tasks;
- completeness of analysis of recent research and publications on a general problem;
- the purpose of the article corresponds to the problem considered by the author;
- substantiation of the received scientific results;
- scientific conclusions and their correspondence to the purpose of the article;
- prospects for further research in this direction;
- аnd also the reviewer evaluates the terminology of the uniqueness of the article;
- knowledge of the author of scientific literature on the subject of the discussion, including international experience;
- peculiarities of the author's style and language (clarity of language and style, necessity of additional scientific and literary editing, etc.).
The review should contain specific conclusions about the expediency of the publication, indicating the main shortcomings of the article (if any), as well as the conclusion about the possibility of publication: «recommended», «recommended in the light of the correction of these shortcomings»or «not recommended».
The review is made in print, must be signed by the reviewer and certified by the seal of the institution at the place of work of the reviewer.
Reviewers are notified that the manuscripts sent to them are the intellectual property of the authors and refer to information not to be disclosed. Reviewers are prohibited from copying the article submitted for reviewing or using information about the content of the article before it is published. The review takes place taking into account the principles of confidentiality, according to which information on the article (the terms of receipt, content, stages and features of the review, comments of reviewers and the final decision on publication) is not disclosed to anyone other than authors and reviewers. Violation of this requirement is possible only if there are signs or statements about unreliability or falsification of the article's materials. In case of receiving any comments from the reviewers, she returns to the author for revision.
The article sent by the author after the revision is sent for re-review.
The presence of a positive review is not sufficient reason for the publication of the article. The final decision on the expediency of publication is taken by the editorial board of the publication.
The procedure for reviewing and adhering to editorial ethics is organized in accordance with the principles declared by the Committee on Publication Ethics (Committee on Publication Ethics / COPE)
The editors reserve the right to reduce and correct the sent articles.
Articles sent to authors for correction must be returned to the editor not later than 10 days after receipt. The return of the article in later terms accordingly changes the date of its receipt to the editorial office.
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
The editorial board of the collection of scientific works with full responsibility approaches the issues of support of scientific reputation and closely monitors the compliance of published materials with high standards. The editorial board in its activities is guided by the recommendations of the Committee on the Ethics of Scientific Publications - the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and also takes into account the valuable experience of authoritative international journals and publishers.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE MAIN EDITOR:
The editor-in-chief of the Bulletin is responsible for decisions regarding articles submitted to the publication in the collection of scientific papers. Verification of the work on the relevance and its significance for fundamental and applied science are the main factors influencing the decision to publish an article based on the provisions of the current legislation. To make such a decision, the editor-in-chief of the Bulletin can consult other members of the editorial board and be guided by its policy.
The editor-in-chief and staff of the editorial board should not disclose information about the submitted manuscript to third parties, except for reviewers, potential reviewers, consultants to the editorial board, and also the publisher. The information contained in the article submitted for publication should not be used in any personal work of the editor-in-chief and members of the editorial board without the written permission of the author. Confidential information or ideas received during review should be kept secret and not used for personal gain. The editor-in-chief should refuse to participate in the review of the article if there is a conflict of interest in connection with competition, cooperation or other relations with someone from authors, companies or institutions related to the article. The editor-in-chief should require all authors of the publication to provide information on relevant competing interests and publish corrections if a conflict of interest has been identified after publication.
When an ethical complaint is received regarding the submitted scientific article to the Bulletin, its editor takes appropriate measures, including contact with the author of this article and proper consideration of his complaint.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF REVIEWERS:
Each manuscript received for review must be considered a confidential document. It should not be discussed with third parties, except for those authorized by the editor. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should express their point of view clearly, reasonably and not allow the manifestation of personal claims to the author.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORS:
The authors of the article must guarantee the originality of their work, and when using information or words from other publications, this should be appropriately indicated by reference or indicated in the text. If there is a significant or partial overlap between the manuscript in question and any other published work, reviewers should pay attention to this to the editor-in-chief.
Plagiarism has many forms, from presenting someone else's work as its own before copying or paraphrasing the essential parts of someone else's work without reference to the source, as well as statements about their rights to the results obtained in studies conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms is unacceptable and is an unethical behavior when published. The granting of the same manuscript to more than one edition at the same time is also considered a violation of ethical norms and rules.
The author must declare without fail the presence or absence of a conflict of interest. A conflict of interest can be any situation (financial relations, service or work in institutions having financial or political interest in published materials, job duties, etc.) that can influence the author of the manuscript and lead to concealment, distortion of data or changing their interpretation.
If the author finds an error or inaccuracy in his published work, he should notify the editor-in-chief about this and promote the publication of a refutation or correction of the article. In the event that the editor-in-chief receives information about significant errors in the publication from a third party, the author must refute or provide proof of the accuracy and reliability of his work.
It is inadmissible to use unfair text borrowing and assigning research results not belonging to the authors of the submitted manuscript.
The authors must ensure that the submitted manuscript:
- describes completely the original work;
- is not plagiarism;
- has not been published before in any language;
- the information used or words from other publications are appropriately indicated by reference or indicated in the text.
Existing copyright laws and conventions must be observed. Materials protected by copyright (for example, tables, figures or large quotations) should only be reproduced with the permission of their owner.
The editors reserve the right to check the received manuscripts for plagiarism. Textual similarity in the amount of more than 20% is unacceptable.