Publication Ethics

Publication ethics and malpractice statement of the NAS RK journals

     The Editorial office of the scientific journals of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Kazakhstan is committed to promoting the highest standard of publishing ethical norms established by the international academic community and preventing any violations of these norms both in its own work and when working with all the participants of the academic publishing process: authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, distributors, and readers.

     The Publication ethics of the NAS RK journals are developed in compliance with the Code of Conduct of the Committee on Publication Ethics.

     Below are the principles that are established for those who involved in the publication process.

Editors

      The Editorial Board and editors of the NAS RK journals regard as a mandate:

−                   to carry out their duties in a balanced, objective way, without any discrimination based on gender, ethnic or geographical origin of authors.

−                   to make a decision to accept or reject a paper for publication only on paper’s importance, originality, and the study’s relevance to the journal.

−                   to follow reasonable procedures in the event of complaints of an ethical or conflict nature.

−                   to respect the author and his/her paper, trying to penetrate into his/her plans, requirements and wishes, trying to support author creatively, rather than suppress him/her with criticism, not to dictate the terms to the author, but to negotiate with him/her, relying only on well-founded comments, not to host illegally in author’s original.

Authors

     Submission by authors of an article to the NAS RK journals implies that the paper has not been published previously, and it is not under consideration for publication in other journals, that its publication is approved by all authors and by the responsible bodies where the work was carried out, and that it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in any other language, including electronically. In particular, translations into other languages of papers already published are not accepted.

     The authors should refrain from misrepresenting research results, which could damage the trust in the editorial office of NAS RK and the journal, the professionalism of scientific authorship, and ultimately the entire scientific body.

     Maintaining the integrity of the research and its presentation is helped by following the rules of good scientific practice. The most important rules are:

     Inadmissibility of plagiarism, keeping editorial secret, i.e. not to disclose, without consent of an author, before and after the journal came out, working process on it in the publishing house (not to discuss with anybody advantages and disadvantages of works, comments and corrections to them, not familiar anybody with internal review), not to read without permission of the author to anybody author original;

     Research results should be presented clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation (including image-based manipulation). Authors should adhere to discipline-specific rules for acquiring, selecting and processing data.

     Authors are strongly advised to ensure the author group, the corresponding author, and the order of authors are all correct at submission. Adding and/or deleting authors during the revision stages is generally not permitted, but in some cases may be warranted. Reasons for changes in authorship should be clearly explained in detail. Please note that changes to authorship cannot be made after acceptance of a manuscript

     Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and be ready to provide corrections in time, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed. All authors of a paper should have significantly contributed to the research.

     Authors should declare any potential conflicts of interest.

     Authors should ensure that any studies involving human and animal subjects received regulatory, ethical and other approvals from national, local and institutional bodies.

Reviewers

     Reviewers should provide objective judgments, follow the timeline and should point out relevant published works, which are not yet cited.

     Reviewed articles should be treated confidentially, alert the editor if any submitted content is substantially similar to that under review.

     Reviewers are chosen in such a way that there is no conflict of interests with respect to the research, the authors and/or the research funders.

     The Editorial office preserves the anonymity of reviewers and promote the publication of corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.

Publisher

      The Gylym Publishing house of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Kazakhstan monitor and safeguard publishing ethics.

Dealing with unethical behavior

Identification of unethical behaviour

     Research misconduct and unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to the attention of the Editorial office and publisher at any time, by anyone. Such action should provide sufficient information and proof in order to initiate an investigation. All allegations are treated with all solemnity, until a successful decision or conclusion is made.

     Misconduct and unethical behaviour may be by intention, or by negligence.

Investigation

     An initial decision should be taken by editors, who should consult with or seek advice from the publisher, if appropriate.

      Small problems for misconduct could be solved without the need to consult more widely. In any event, the author should be given the opportunity to respond to any allegations.

      In case of serious misconduct the editorial office has a right either to investigate the available evidence by itself or to further consult with the Editorial board and the Presidium of NAS RK.

Outcomes 

−        Informing the author or reviewer where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.

−        A more strongly worded letter to the author or reviewer covering the misconduct and as a warning to future behaviour.

−        A formal letter to the author's or reviewer's responsible bodies or funding agency.

−        Formal retraction or withdrawal of an article from the journal, in conjunction with informing the author, indexing services and the readership of the publication.

−        Imposition of a formal embargo on contributions from an individual for a defined period.

−        Reporting the case and outcome to the Scientific department, the Presidium, the General Meeting of NAS RK or higher authority for further investigation and action.