Editorial Board of the Collected Scientific
’) follows ethics norms
accepted by international scientific community and makes every endeavour to
prevent any infringements of the norms. The Editorial Board follows the
guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (
Duties of Editors
papers are subject to the double blind peer-review process by reviewers that are experts
in the area of the particular paper.
The factors, which
are taken into account in reviewing process, are relevance, soundness,
significance, originality, readability, and quality of language.
The possible decisions
include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
If authors are
encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the
revised submission will be accepted.
will not be re-reviewed.
Articles may be
rejected without review, if they are obviously not suitable for publication.
acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force
regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The papers are routinely scanned for plagiarism using free online plagiarism checker tools (https://smallseotools.com/plagiarism-checker).
When a conflict of interests arising, all the
participants of reviewing process should inform the Editorial Board. All the
contentions questions are considered in the Board meeting.
The accepted papers are allocated in open access on
the journal site; copyrights reserved.
Duties of Reviewers
evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race,
gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or
political philosophy of the authors.
The staff must not
disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the
corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the Publisher,
Reviews should be
conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
assists the Publisher in making editorial decisions and through the editorial
communications with the experts from the scientific board and the author may
assist the author in improving the paper.
received for review are treated as confidential documents and are reviewed by
A reviewer should
also call to the Publisher's attention any substantial similarity or overlap
between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of
which they have personal knowledge.
contributions and studies research should present an accurate account of the
work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance.
A paper should
contain sufficient details and references to permit others to replicate the
work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical
behaviour and are unacceptable.
The authors should
ensure that they have written original regular or entirely review works, if the
authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been obligatory
and appropriately cited or quoted.
same manuscript to more than one publication concurrently constitutes unethical
publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception,
design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.
of financial support for the reported results can be specified