Ethics of scientific publications

The editorial board of the electronic scientific journal “Doklady Bashkirskogo Universiteta” follows the international ethical rules of scientific publications, including the rules of decency, confidentiality, supervision of publications, taking into account possible conflicts of interest, etc. In its activities, the editorial board also follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics ( and relies on the valuable experience of reputable international journals and publishers.


Author responsibilities

Reporting standards

We expect the authors to present reliable results of the work done, as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the study. The data underlying the research should be clearly stated in writing. The article should contain enough information for verification and repetition of experiments by other researchers. Fraudulent or knowingly false statements are considered as unethical behavior and unacceptable.

Data access and storage

The editorial office may ask to provide initial data for editorial review. Authors should be ready to provide public access to such data, if possible, and in any case should retain the original materials for a reasonable period of time after their publication.

Originality and plagiarism

Authors should submit only original works. When using text or graphic information obtained from the work of others, references to the relevant publications or the written permission of the author are required. Plagiarism of any kind is considered as unethical behavior and unacceptable.

Multiple, repeated and competing publications

Authors must indicate that their work is being published for the first time. If the elements of the manuscript were previously published in another article, the authors are required to refer to the earlier work and indicate the essential difference between the new work and the previous one. Word-for-word copying of one’s own works and their paraphrasing are unacceptable; they can only be used as a basis for new conclusions. Submitting an article to more than one journal at the same time is considered as unethical behavior and unacceptable.

Source Confirmation

Authors are required to acknowledge the contributions of others who have influenced the nature of the research presented. Be sure to have bibliographic references to the works used. Information obtained privately, through conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties, should not be used without explicit written permission from their source.

Authorship of the work

Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the concept, design, execution, or interpretation of the claimed research. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as contributors. Those who have been involved in some significant aspect of the research project should be displayed in the list of project participants. The author must ensure that the names of all co-authors and project participants are placed in the list of co-authors and participants, and that all co-authors have read and approved the final version of the scientific work and gave their consent to its publication.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

All authors must disclose in their papers any financial or other significant conflicts of interest that may affect the results of the study or their interpretation. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

Significant errors in published works

If authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they are obliged to notify the editor or publisher of the journal immediately and assist them in eliminating or correcting the error. If the editor or publisher learns from a third party that the published work contains significant errors, the author must immediately remove or correct these errors or provide the editors with evidence of correctness of the original article.


Editorial Responsibilities

Decision about publication of an article

Submission of an article for consideration implies that it contains new non-trivial scientific results obtained by the authors, which have not been published anywhere before. Each article is reviewed. Reviewing follows a “double-blind” scheme, when both the reviewer and the author do not know each other. Experts have every opportunity to freely express motivated criticisms regarding the level and clarity of presentation of the material presented, its compliance with the profile of the journal, novelty and reliability of the results. The recommendations of the reviewers are the basis for making the final decision on the publication of the article. Responsibility for the decision to publish lies entirely with the editors of the journal. The editors make a decision about publication of an article, guided by the policy of the journal, taking into account the current legislation in the copyright field. The editors evaluate manuscripts solely on their scientific content, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship and political views of the authors. The article, if accepted for publication, is placed in the public domain; copyright is reserved by the authors.


The editors and all editorial staff may not disclose information about submitted works to anyone other than the respective authors, reviewers, other editorial consultants and, if necessary, the publisher. The editors and all editorial staff do not have the right to use unpublished materials used in the submitted manuscript in their own research without the written consent of the author.

Conflict of interest and ethical conflict resolution

In case of a conflict of interest resulting from a competitive relationship, collaboration or other relationships with one of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with submitted manuscripts, the editor passes the manuscript for consideration to another member of the editorial board. Editors should ask all participants in the process to disclose existing conflict of interest. If the conflict of interest was revealed after the publication of the article, the editors are obliged to ensure the publication of the amendments. When filing an ethical complaint regarding a submitted manuscript or published article, the editor must take reasonable retaliatory action in cooperation with the publisher (or the public). Every report of unethical behavior will be considered, even if it came years after the publication of the article. If the complaint is upheld, appropriate corrections, rebuttals or apologies should be published.


Responsibilities of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through collaboration between the editor and the author, can help the author improve his or her work.


Any reviewer selected to evaluate the work who believes that they are not qualified to review the research presented in the scientific work or knows that their reviewing will be too slow should notify the editor and refuse to carry out a review.


Any submitted manuscript is treated as a confidential document. It is unacceptable to show it to other reviewers or discuss it with other experts without permission of the editor-in-chief.

Objectivity standards

Reviews of scientific papers should be objective. Personal criticism aimed at the author is inappropriate. Reviewers are required to express their views clearly and reasonably.

Source confirmation

Reviewers should identify relevant published work in the peer-reviewed material that has not been cited by the authors. Any statements, conclusions or arguments that have already been used in any previous publications should be appropriately presented as citations. 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.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Unpublished materials used in a submitted manuscript should not be used in the reviewer's own research without the written consent of the author. Non-public information or ideas obtained during peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not take part in the review and evaluation of manuscripts in which they are personally interested.