The publication ethics of the journal of "Philosophical polylogue" is based on international ethical standards, in particular those developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics: COPE's Best Practices Guidelines for Journal Editors (http://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct). Ethical standards concern all participants in the publishing process: the editorial board, the authors and the reviewers.
Obligations of the Editorial Board
• The Editorial Board is responsible for all published materials. This means that the Editorial Board strives to satisfy the scientific demands of readers and authors, constantly improves the journal, ensures the quality of published materials, does not interfere with the freedom of author's self-expression, excludes the satisfaction of financial and other pragmatic needs at the expense of scientific and ethical standards, is always ready to publish corrections, clarifications, refutations and apologies when it is necessary.
• The Editorial Board decides whether to publish or reject the manuscripts solely considering their professional level, on the basis of editorial policy and copyright norms, regardless of race, sex, nationality, citizenship, religious, ideological or political position of the author.
• The Editorial Board strictly follows the rules of double-blind review in which information about authors and reviewers are closed for both parties.
• Members of the Editorial Board can not, without the written consent of the authors, disclose the information contained in the manuscripts submitted for publication to third parties (with the exception of reviewers).
• The Editorial Board stops preparing the manuscript for publication if it reveals violations of the publication ethics expressed in plagiarism, sending previously published materials to the journal, appropriating the results of other scholars' research, as well as falsifying the data.
• All meaningful changes to the text are agreed with the author. In case of disagreement with the changes both parties have the right to refuse publication of the material.
• The materials published in the Journal may not reflect the views of the Editorial Board and the founders of the Journal.
Obligations of the authors
• The authors provide original works for publication. All sources used in the work are given exhaustive bibliographic references. All fragments of text and graphics borrowed from other sources are provided according to the citation rules indicating the author and the source. Plagiarism, as well as the inclusion of fragments of texts without the permission of rightholders is unacceptable.
• Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal is not acceptable. Full or partial republishing of materials should be agreed with the editor. If a permission to republish is obtained, subsequent versions of the text require a reference to the first publication.
• The authors indicate the contribution of all individuals whose work is the basis of the study. Those who made a significant contribution at the stage of preparing an article for publication but can not be considered an author, should be thanked. Persons who did not take part in the study should not be listed as co-authors.
• The research should be based on reliable results. The use and promulgation of knowingly unreliable data is unacceptable.
• The authors submit their personal data (place of work, position, e-mail address) for publication in the Journal.
• The authors agree that their article will be sent for review and undertake to cooperate with editors to improve, reduce or supplement their article in accordance with the comments of the reviewer.
• The authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or contentious conflict of interest that could affect the results of the study. All sources of financial support for the project should be made public.
• The authors are responsible for the fact that the presented publication does not contain information that could harm the interests of people who provided the information necessary for research.
• If errors or inaccuracies are found in an article that is at the review stage or has already been published, the authors must notify the editorial office as soon as possible.
Reviewers' Commitments
• The reviewer is an expert in the field of knowledge to which the peer-reviewed manuscript belongs. The review should objectively evaluate the scientific article and contain a comprehensive analysis of its merits and demerits. The reviewer who does not, in his opinion, possess sufficient qualification for the evaluation of the manuscript, or can not be objective, or can not prepare a review in due time, must notify the editor about it, asking him to exclude him from the review process.
• Peer review is based on the principle of confidentiality: a peer-reviewed manuscript or the review itself can not be submitted for review or discussion to third parties. The reviewer should not use information about the content of the work before it is published for their own benefit or for the benefit of third parties.
• In the event of a conflict of interest that may arise from competition, cooperation or any other relationship with any of the authors, projects or organizations with which the article is linked, the reviewer should notify the editorial office thereof.
• The reviewer is obliged to give an objective and reasoned assessment of the results of the research. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
