The Editor-in-Chief, the Editorial Board and the Editorial Board of the scientific journal “Northern Archives and Expeditions” undertake to comply with the guidelines and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and to take into account the experience of authoritative international journals and publishers.
The Editorial Board of the journal “Northern Archives and Expeditions” (hereinafter referred to as the Journal) makes every effort to comply with the ethical standards accepted by the international scientific community.
Evaluation of articles
All articles undergo a double-blind review process and must meet academic quality standards. If approved by the editor, submissions will be reviewed by reviewers whose identities will remain anonymous to the authors.
The journal team may seek advice beyond standard peer review, such as on ethics-related materials. We may consult the peer reviewers before deciding on appropriate action, including evaluation by additional editors and refusal to consider the submission further.
Originality and plagiarism
Ethical standards for publications are needed to ensure the high quality of scholarly publications, the credibility of scholarly research on the part of the public.
It is necessary to avoid:
Data fabrication and falsification: data fabrication means that the researcher did not do any work and made up the data. Data fabrication means the researcher did the experiment, but then changed some of the data. Both of these actions undermine people’s confidence in scientists.
Plagiarism: Using someone else’s ideas and work without giving them credit is dishonest and unfair. Copying at least one sentence from another’s manuscript or even your own from a previously published manuscript without a citation is considered plagiarism – convey the meaning in your own words. Articles with more than 85% originality in the Anti-Plagiarism system will be accepted for consideration. All citations used must have correct references.
Submitting to multiple journals: It is unethical to submit one manuscript to more than one journal at a time. Such actions are time-consuming for editors and reviewers and can damage the reputation of journals if a manuscript is published in more than one scholarly publication.
Manuscripts found to be plagiarized by other authors will be rejected. Any published articles may need to be corrected or reviewed.
Duplicate Publications: means publishing similar manuscripts based on the same experiment. This will result in readers not paying attention to your manuscripts.
Misattribution: All authors cited must have made significant scientific contributions to the study. Be sure to identify everyone who made significant scientific contributions, including students and lab assistants.
Ethics of using generative AI
The use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools when writing scientific articles in the journal “Northern Archives and Expeditions” is unacceptable. Publications in which AI-generated fragments are found are rejected without the right of revision.
Duties of the Editor-in-Chief, editorial board and other editorial management bodies
The editorial board organizes the evaluation of the manuscript, ensures proper confidentiality when working with materials submitted to the journal, identifies conflicts of interest and resolves emerging ethical conflicts.
When receiving materials (manuscripts), the editorial board monitors the authors’ compliance with the rules for submitting manuscripts, including the availability of annotations, keywords, and bibliographic lists.
The Editorial Board evaluates the manuscript for compliance with the journal’s subject matter and appoints two reviewers with sufficient qualifications to assess the quality of the submitted materials. When appointing reviewers, the editorial board proceeds from the need to ensure that there is no conflict of interest and that the review process is conducted in good faith.
The editorial board organizes the examination of the submitted manuscript according to the principle of double-blind review. Experts are given the opportunity to freely express motivated critical comments regarding the level and clarity of the presentation of the presented material, its compliance with the profile of the journal, the novelty and reliability of the results. The recommendations of the reviewers are the basis for making a final decision on the publication of the article.
The decision on publication is made by the editorial board of the journal in accordance with the policy of the journal, taking into account the current legislation in the field of copyright. The evaluation of the manuscript is based solely on its scientific content, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship and political views of the authors.
The editor, members of the editorial board, and all editorial staff have no right to disclose information about submitted works to anyone other than the respective authors, reviewers, and the editor-in-chief.
The editor, members of the editorial board and the editorial board are not allowed to use unpublished materials used in the submitted manuscript in their own research without the written consent of the author. When submitting an ethical complaint regarding a submitted manuscript or a published article, the editorial board takes reasonable retaliatory measures. Every report of unethical behavior is reviewed, even if it was received years after the publication of the article. If the complaint is supported, appropriate corrections, refutations, or apologies should be published.
Responsibilities of authors
The authors provide an article that presents the results of their own original research. It is expected that all the authors whose names are indicated in the application have made significant contributions to the work and are collectively responsible for the results.
If the manuscript has been prepared by a co-author, it is expected that the consent to submit the manuscript has been received explicitly from all co-authors at the initial stage of submission. If correspondence regarding a manuscript is conducted by one of the co-authors on behalf of all others, this person is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors receive all information about their work.
The journal expects that the manuscript has been prepared for a specific academic audience of this journal and has not been sent to other journals for simultaneous review. Nevertheless, we recognize that authors have the right to submit their manuscripts to another location at the same time. However, if this has been done, we strongly ask the authors to inform the editorial board. If the author’s manuscript has been approved for publication by any of the journals to which it has been submitted, the author must immediately withdraw the manuscript from all other journals. If the author neglects this requirement, their manuscript can be rejected by the journal at any stage. Despite the fact that our journal may accept for review a manuscript that was simultaneously submitted for review to another journal, it will not publish or even approve such a manuscript for publication.
Authors do not have the right to submit previously published manuscripts, in whole or in part; manuscripts presenting the same results of the same research that have already led to a similar publication. The journal expects that authors can consider their manuscripts as a potential part of their future books or monographs, but not vice versa.
If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his published work, he is obliged to immediately notify the editor or the manager of the journal and assist them in correcting or correcting the error. If the editor or manager finds out from a third party that the published work contains significant errors, the author is informed about it, and the author is obliged to immediately remove or correct these errors or provide the editorial board with evidence of the correctness of the original article.
Authors have the right to withdraw their manuscript at any time when it is under review.
Responsibilities of reviewers
The main task of the reviewer is an objective and prompt assessment of the compliance of materials (manuscripts) with the journal’s subject matter, scientific novelty and the level of results presented in the manuscript, the quality of preparation of materials and the formulation of recommendations for publication of materials, their revision or rejection in compliance with an appropriate level of confidentiality, following generally accepted standards of objectivity, ensuring non-disclosure of information and timely informing about conflicts of interest.
The reviewer makes a significant contribution to the activities of the scientific journal. His expert assessment helps the editor in making editorial decisions and, through the cooperation of the editor and the author, can help the author to improve his work.
Reviewers should identify relevant published works in the reviewed material that have not been properly mentioned or cited by the authors. The reviewer is also obliged to draw the editor’s attention to significant or partial similarities with any other work with which the reviewer is directly familiar.
Unpublished materials used in the submitted manuscript should not be used in the reviewer’s own research without the written consent of the author. Confidential information or ideas obtained during the review process should remain confidential and not be used for personal gain.