Publication Ethics

The scientific journal “Ars Administrandi” is a peer reviewed scientific journal that adheres the international standards of publication ethics and makes efforts to prevent abuse and violations of ethical standards.

The Regulations on ethical standards of publication policy are based on the Guidelines for Journal editors of the Committee on Publication Ethics (Committee on Publication Ethics - COPE), Guidelines and Recommendations on ethical standards by the Elsevier publisher, Guidelines on ethical standards for editors, Guidelines for submission and formatting of scientific articles in the journals indexed in international scietometric databases, of the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (ed. by Kirillova, O. V.) and Regulations on the ethical standards of editorial policy of Perm State University.


on ethical standards of publication policy
of the scientific journal “Ars Administrandi”

The present Regulations contain a list of ethical standards for all parties involved in the act of manuscripts publishing in the scientific journal “Ars Administrandi”: authors, editorial staff, editorial council, editorial board, reviewers, publisher and founder. These Regulations also provide a procedure for resolving situations related to violation of publication ethics.


1.1. The Regulations prescribe ethical standards for all parties involved in the act of publishing of original articles in the scientific journal “Ars Administrandi” (hereafter referred to as the Journal): authors, editorial staff, editorial council, editorial board, reviewers, publisher and founder. These Regulations are based on a responsible attitude to manuscript publication including the standards of decency, privacy, surveillance of publications, considering the possible conflicts of interests.

1.2. Perm State University (hereafter referred to as PSU) is the founder and publisher of the Journal and is responsible for the control over all stages of the scholarly publishing and acknowledges its ethical and other obligations associated with the publication of scientific articles in the Journal.

1.3. PSU and the editorial staff of the Journal are consistently working at strict adherence to the publication ethics standards in accordance with the recommendations and standards of the international Committee on Publication Ethics – COPE as well as consider the valuable experience of expert international journals and publishers and are guided by the provisions of article 70 “Copyright” of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.


2.1. An author submits to the Journal a scientific article that has not been published before or has not been submitted to other journals. The submission of an article simultaneously to several journals is inadmissible and is considered to be unethical conduct of an author. It also concerns the translation of an article to foreign languages with its further publication in another journal (Standard of a single publication).

2.2. An author submits to the Journal a manuscript that has original research results. In case the author while making a research uses other articles or includes parts of works (citations) of other people, this fact must be properly formalized by specifying the original source in the bibliography list. Plagiarism in any form is unethical and unfair behavior of an author. Self-plagiarism is also a form of plagiarism and is considered by the Journal to be the ethical standards breaking in case the author copies the own works word-for-word and paraphrases them without references to the previous published researches without new conclusion, results or research methods that differentiate the present article from the previous one (Standard of originality (plagiarism and self-plagiarism inadmissibility)).

2.3. Authors must present reliable results of conducted researches. Scientific results should be explained clearly and unambiguously. Deliberately fabrication or falsification of results is inappropriate (Standard of research results reliability).

2.4. An author should present research initial material (data) at the request of the Journal and should be ready to provide public access to them. An author should store data within a reasonable time after the publication for possible reproduction and verification (Standard of initial research data access and storage).

2.5. An author must specify correctly in bibliography list the scientific or other source he/she referred to while making a research and that had significant impact on the study. An author must correctly format quotes (citations) and references to other scientists’ works and must not copy the references to the works he/she has not read (Standard of sources acknowledgement).

2.6. All persons who have made a significant contribution to the research should be listed as co-authors. The composite author should be limited to only those persons. An author submitting a manuscript to the Journal guarantees that all co-authors have been mentioned, all of them have seen, approved the final version of the article and have agreed to submit it to the Journal. The responsible author who submits the article for consideration on behalf and agreement of the composite author is a contact person between the Journal editors and other authors and should inform all co-authors about the stages the article has passed and the decision the Editorial Board of the Journal has made. The acknowledgement to the persons who have contributed to the research results may be expressed in the manuscript (Standard of authorship of a scientific article).

2.7. Authors should reveal financial or other conflict of interest in the article or inform the Journal about the conflict of interest by any other available way as the conflict availability may impact the scientific article assessment and interpretation. The examples of potential conflicts of interest that must be revealed include journey-work, consultation, corporate property, honorarium, experts’ report, application for a patent or registration of a patent, grants or other financial provision of the study. Potential conflicts of interest must be revealed at the stage of a manuscript submission to a journal (Standard of the conflict of interest revelation on behalf of an author).

2.8. In the event an author finds a crucial error or inaccuracy in the article that has already been published, he/she must inform the Journal about the error to make a joint resolution about the way the objective data will be presented. In the event the Journal is informed about the error by third persons, an author must eliminate the error or provide the evidence for its absence (Standard of error correction in published articles).


3.1. An expert evaluation of a scientific article made by a reviewer contributes to the decision-making of the Journal Editorial Board as well as helps the author to improve the article content. The decision to submit an article for publication, to return it to the author for the revision or reject to publish an article is made by Chief Editor or Managing Editor based on the peer review results and recommendations by the Journal Editorial Board (Standard of a reviewer contribution into the editorial decision).

3.2. A reviewer must be highly qualified for an expert peer review of the article. In case a reviewer considers himself/herself not to be qualified enough on the reviewed issues, he/she should reject from an article peer reviewing (Standard of a reviewer qualification).

3.3. A reviewer must provide a review in the time constrains specified by the Journal. In the event the expert examination and peer review of an article can’t be conducted in time, a reviewer must inform about it (Standard of a peer review period).

3.4. A scientific article submitted for peer reviewing must be considered as a confidential document despite the review form. A reviewer may show it or discuss it with other persons only by Chief Editor or Managing Editor’s authority. A reviewer must not use the ideas or information presented in an article before its publication (Standard of confidentiality on behalf of a reviewer).

3.5. A reviewer must conduct an expert evaluation of a scientific article without bias. A reviewer is prohibited to criticize an author personally. A reviewer must evaluate an article according to its scientific content irrespective of the author’s race, sex, nationality, citizenship or political convictions. All decisions made by a reviewer must be reasoned and referred to authoritative sources (Standard of review objectivity).

3.6. Reviewers must denote the works (if there are any) that influenced the research results but had not been mentioned by the author. A reviewer must pay the editorial staff’s attention to essential similarity or coincidence between the article under review and other previously published works that a reviewer is familiar with (Standard of sources acknowledgment).

3.7. A reviewer is not allowed to use materials from the unpublished article in his/her own researches without an author’s written permission. In the event there is a conflict of interest because of competitive, unity or other relations with an author or organization that is related to the article under consideration, a reviewer must reject to peer review the article (Standard of conflict of interest disclosure).


4.1. The journal editorial staff makes a decision what articles submitted for publication must be published based on the observance of publication requirements and peer review results. Manuscripts characterized by scientific value, importance, practical and theoretical consequence are submitted for publication. When making a decision about an article publication, the Journal follows the editorial policy of the Journal and does not publish articles with the sings of slander, insult, plagiarism or copyright offence. A final decision about an article publication is made by Chief Editor or Managing Editor who are responsible for publication of original scientific articles (Standard of the decision about an article publication).

4.2. The Journal editorial staff evaluates only the scientific content of an article irrespective of the author’s race, nationality, origin, citizenship, sex, occupation, place of employment, political, philosophic, religious or other views (Standard of the authors’ equality).

4.3. The Journal editorial staff ensures the confidentiality of the submitted article that means it is prohibited to hand information over to third persons. The Journal must not divulge any information about the submitted article to anyone else except the author, reviewers, the publisher and the founder (Standard of confidentiality).

4.4. The Journal guarantees that the materials from the article that has not been accepted for publication will not be used by the members of the editorial board without an author’s written agreement. The editorial board of the Journal will not consider an article in the event there is a conflict of interest resulted from competition, collaboration or other relations with authors and organizations contributing to the research. The Journal is obliged to demand from all participants of the publication process an article revealing the rival of interest. Chief Editor or Managing Editor must demand from all authors to provide information about the conflict of interest and must publish the correction, if there are any, after the article has been published. If it is necessary, Chief Editor or Managing Editor may publish the disproof, express anxiety or retract an article (Standard of conflict of interest revelation on behalf of the editorial staff).

4.5. The Journal protects an author’s reputation and seriously treats all cases of plagiarism or other facts of unfair behavior during the process of a scientific article publication. The Journal editorial staff efficiently considers any ethical complaint to submitted or published article despite the time when it was received. The journal must take reasonable measures to these complaints. These measures include the information of authors and the complaint processing, if necessary further communication with particular institutes, research organizations or institutions. In the event there is a confirmation of the complaint, the correcting, disproof or other corresponding statement is published in the scientific journal. The journal may reject to publish the article, retract the article, stop cooperating with the author for a particular period or take other necessary measures to prevent the unethical conduct of the author. The journal has the right not to respond to the charge in plagiarism if the accuser provides inadequate personal information (e.g. introduces false names), has an unethical conduct or threatens. The Journal must not discuss the cases of probable plagiarism with persons who do not have a direct bearing on them. (Standard of dealing with an ethical claim).

4.6. Under any circumstances the Journal editorial staff must not make authors cite articles published in the scientific journal “Ars Administrandi” or other scientific periodicals as a prerequisite for an article submission. Any recommendations to cite works must be based on their scientific importance and must be used as a mean to improve the provided material. The editorial staff of the Journal may recommend the authors sources in the review but these recommendations should not be considered as requests to cite some particular scientific articles (Standard of the citation of the journal where an article is published).


5.1. The publisher and the founder must follow the standards and procedures that further the maintenance of publication ethical standards by editors, reviewers and authors.

5.2. The publisher and a founder do not have the right to influence a journal publication policy. The Journal makes an individual decision about the expediency of an article publication without a publisher and a founder’s interference.

5.3. The publisher and the founder must provide legal and other assistant to the Journal if necessary, including the assistance in the investigation of a research and manuscript abusive practice and must further these cases solution.

5.4. The publisher and the founder guarantee timely publication of the Journal issues.

5.5. The publisher and the founder provided Chief Editor agreement publish correcting, explanations or withdraw the articles that broke the scientific ethics or had crucial errors.


In the event there are ethical claims that concern the articles published in the journal, Chief Editor together with the Publisher and the Founder take appropriate measures in accordance to “Retraction Guidelines” of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). These measures include the investigation of the unethical conduct, interaction with the authors of the article and the reasoning of the corresponding complaint or an applicant’s claim, as well as the interaction with the particular organizations, scientific and research centers in the frameworks of cooperation on the issues of research purity and publication retraction (Guidelines implementation).

© Ars Administrandi, 2011-2017 ISSN 2218-9173