Publication Ethics

The editorial board of the serial scientific publication Emigrantica conducts its activities in accordance with the Law of the Russian Federation No. 2124-1 of December 27, 1991, "On Mass Media," the Charter of the A.M. Gorky Institute of World Literature of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IMLI RAS), as well as the publication ethics of the serial scientific publication Emigrantica outlined below. These ethics were adopted in line with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE, Code of Conduct for Scientific Publications) and approved by the editorial board's decision, while also taking into account the valuable experience of authoritative international journals and publishers.

To prevent unethical practices in publishing (such as plagiarism, presentation of inaccurate information, etc.), ensure high-quality scientific publications, and gain public recognition of the author's research results, every member of the editorial board, author, reviewer, publisher, and institution involved in the publishing process must adhere to ethical standards, norms, and rules and take all reasonable measures to prevent their violation. Compliance with the rules of publication ethics by all participants in this process helps protect authors' intellectual property rights, enhance the quality of the publication, and eliminate the possibility of unauthorized use of authors' materials for the benefit of individuals.

Key Terms Used in This Policy:

  • Ethics of Scientific Publications: A system of professional behavior norms governing the relationships between authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, and readers in the creation, dissemination, and use of scientific publications.
  • Author: An individual or group of individuals (collective authors) involved in creating a publication of research results.
  • Editor-in-Chief: The person leading the editorial team and making final decisions regarding the production and release of the serial scientific publication.
  • Publisher: A legal or natural person responsible for releasing a scientific publication.
  • Scientific Article: A completed and published work by an author.
  • Plagiarism: The intentional appropriation of authorship of someone else's scientific or artistic work, ideas, or inventions. Plagiarism may violate copyright or patent laws and, as such, may entail legal liability.
  • Editor: A representative of the serial scientific publication or publisher who prepares materials for publication and maintains communication with authors and readers of scientific publications.
  • Editorial Board: A consultative body composed of a group of authoritative individuals who assist the editor-in-chief in selecting, preparing, and evaluating works for publication.
  • Reviewer: An expert acting on behalf of the serial scientific publication, conducting a scientific review of author materials to determine their suitability for publication.
  • Manuscript: An author’s work submitted to the editorial office for publication but not yet published.
  • Reader: Any individual who has accessed published materials.

1. Principles of Professional Ethics in the Publisher’s Activities

In its activities, the publisher is responsible for the public dissemination of authorial works, which necessitates adherence to the following fundamental principles and procedures:

1.1. Promote the fulfillment of ethical obligations by the editorial team, editorial-publishing group, editorial board, reviewers, and authors in accordance with these requirements; 1.2. Support the editorial team of the serial scientific publication in addressing ethical complaints regarding published materials and facilitate interaction with other serial scientific publications and/or publishers if it aids in fulfilling editorial duties; 1.3. Ensure the confidentiality of information received from authors and any data prior to its publication; 1.4. Recognize that the activity of the serial scientific publication is not a commercial project and does not aim to generate profit; 1.5. Be prepared to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when necessary; 1.6. Enable the editorial team of the serial scientific publication to exclude publications containing plagiarism or inaccurate data; 1.7. The publisher (editor) has the right to reject a manuscript or request its revision by the author if it violates the Rules adopted by the serial scientific publication and agreed upon with the publisher; 1.8. Upon acceptance for publication, an article is made openly accessible; copyright remains with the authors; 1.9. Include information about financial support for the research if the author provides such information in the article; 1.10. The editorial team must take all measures to correct substantive, grammatical, stylistic, or other errors; 1.11. Coordinate any editorial corrections to the article with the author; 1.12. Avoid delaying the release of the serial scientific publication.

Article Retraction Policy

Based on the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the editorial team of the serial scientific publication Emigrantica adheres to the following policy regarding the retraction of publications.

Grounds for Retraction Retraction is warranted for serious violations of scientific publication ethics, including significant plagiarism, fabrication, or falsification of data, among others.

Purpose of Retraction Retraction serves as a mechanism to correct published information and inform readers about publications containing serious flaws or erroneous data that cannot be trusted. Such unreliability may result from honest errors or intentional violations. Retractions are also used to alert readers to cases of duplicate publications, plagiarism, and the concealment of significant conflicts of interest that could affect the interpretation of data or recommendations for its use.

The purpose of retraction is to correct the scientific record and ensure its accuracy, not to punish authors. The outcome of a retraction is the editorial board’s confirmation that the article contains violations. Authors may disagree with the editors’ stance, but this does not negate the editors’ right to initiate the retraction process.

An article may be retracted by its author(s), publisher, or editor. If the author(s) refuse to retract the article, the publisher has the right to retract it without their consent, as the publisher bears responsibility for the content of the serial scientific publication.

Results of Retraction The results of a retraction are reflected in the publication with a note in the article’s title indicating its retraction, a list of reasons for the retraction under the abstract, and an indication of the individuals or organizations that initiated it.

Retraction does not mean the removal of the article from the scientific publication, the publication’s website, or bibliographic databases. The article remains in these resources with a clear notice of its retraction and retention of its digital object identifier [DOI] or other permanent link identifying its location. This is necessary because researchers may have already cited the article, and they must be informed of its retraction.

Borrowing and Plagiarism Plagiarism can take many forms, from presenting someone else’s work as one’s own to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of others’ works (without attribution) or claiming ownership of others’ research results.

Plagiarism in all its forms is an unethical act and unacceptable. The scientific serial publication Emigrantica does not publish plagiarism in any form, including textual plagiarism, idea plagiarism, or data plagiarism.

The editorial team considers the following as forms of plagiarism:

  • Use (literal citation) of any materials in any volume without indicating the source;
  • Use of images, drawings, photographs, tables, graphs, diagrams, or any other forms of graphical representation without indicating the source;
  • Use of images, drawings, photographs, tables, graphs, diagrams, or any other forms of graphical representation published in scientific or popular publications without the copyright holder’s permission;
  • Use of materials without written permission from authors or copyright holders who prohibit their use without specific agreement.

The editorial team considers the following as forms of improper borrowing:

  • Lack of graphical highlighting of verbatim quoted text despite providing source references;
  • Incorrect citations (incomplete bibliographic descriptions hindering source identification);
  • References to secondary sources without explicitly noting the original source (error in identifying the primary source);
  • Absence of in-text references to sources listed in the bibliography.

Authors of manuscripts must submit fully original works. References to the results of other authors’ works must be accompanied by citations of the relevant primary sources (to be included in the reference list).

Manuscripts submitted to the scientific serial publication Emigrantica for publication undergo mandatory plagiarism checks using the "Antiplagiat" system. If the editorial board has grounds for a more detailed review, additional tools for detecting borrowings may be employed.

Detection of idea plagiarism and data plagiarism is conducted during scientific peer review and after publication—based on reader complaints with relevant statements. In case of numerous borrowings, the editorial team acts in accordance with COPE guidelines.

2. Ethical Principles Guiding Authors of Scientific Publications

Authors (or a collective of authors) submitting materials to the serial scientific publication Emigrantica acknowledge their primary responsibility for the novelty and accuracy of research results, which requires adherence to the following principles:

2.1. Authors must provide accurate results of conducted research. Intentionally erroneous or falsified statements are unacceptable; 2.2. Authors must ensure that the research results presented in the submitted manuscript are fully original. Borrowed fragments or statements must be properly attributed with the author and primary source. Excessive borrowing, as well as plagiarism in any form (including unacknowledged quotations, paraphrasing, or claiming ownership of others’ research results), is unethical and unacceptable. Unattributed borrowing will be considered plagiarism by the editorial board; 2.3. Authors must present only authentic facts and data; provide sufficient information for other researchers to verify and replicate experiments; avoid using privately obtained information without open written permission; and refrain from fabricating or falsifying data; 2.4. Authors must avoid duplicate publications (in the cover letter, the author must state that the work is being published for the first time). If certain elements of the manuscript were previously published, the author must cite the earlier work and indicate differences from the new work; 2.5. Authors must not submit a manuscript to the serial scientific publication that has been sent to another journal or serial publication for consideration, nor an article already published in another journal or serial publication; 2.6. Contributions of all individuals who influenced the research process must be acknowledged, particularly by citing works that were significant to the study; 2.7. Authors must adhere to ethical norms when offering criticism or comments on third-party research; 2.8. All individuals who made a substantial contribution to the research must be listed as co-authors. Including individuals who did not participate in the research as co-authors is unacceptable; 2.9. Authors must respect the work of the editorial board and reviewers, addressing identified shortcomings or providing reasoned explanations; 2.10. Authors must submit and format manuscripts according to the rules established by the serial scientific publication; 2.11. If an author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in an article during its review or after publication, they must immediately notify the editorial team of the serial scientific publication; 2.12. Authors must provide the editorial board or publisher with evidence supporting the original article or correct significant errors if such issues are reported by third parties.

3. Ethical Principles in the Reviewer’s Activities

Reviewers conduct scientific evaluations of author materials, and their actions must be impartial, guided by the following principles:

3.1. A manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document and must not be shared for review or discussion with third parties without authorization from the editorial team; 3.2. Reviewers must recognize that submitted manuscripts are the intellectual property of the authors and contain information not subject to disclosure. Confidentiality may only be breached if a reviewer reports the unreliability or falsification of materials in the article; 3.3. Reviewers must alert the editor-in-chief to significant or partial similarities between the evaluated manuscript and another work, as well as instances where references to previously published statements, conclusions, or arguments by this or other authors are absent; 3.4. Reviewers must note relevant published works not cited in the article; 3.5. Reviewers must provide an objective and reasoned assessment of the research results presented, with clearly justified recommendations. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable; 3.6. Reviewer comments and suggestions must be objective and principled, aimed at enhancing the scientific quality of the manuscript; 3.7. Reviewers must base their decisions on specific facts and provide evidence to support their conclusions; 3.8. Reviewers are prohibited from making copies of manuscripts for personal use; 3.9. Reviewers must not use knowledge of a work’s content for personal gain before its publication; 3.10. A reviewer who believes they lack sufficient qualifications to evaluate a manuscript or cannot remain objective (e.g., due to a conflict of interest with the author or organization) must inform the editor and request exclusion from the review process; 3.11. Reviews are confidential. The reviewer’s full name is known only to the managing editor and the editor-in-chief of the serial scientific publication. This information is not disclosed.

4. Principles of Professional Ethics in the Editor-in-Chief’s Activities

In their work, the editor-in-chief is responsible for the public dissemination of authorial works, which requires adherence to the following fundamental principles:

4.1. In deciding on publication, the editor-in-chief of the serial scientific publication is guided by the accuracy of data presentation and the scientific significance of the work under consideration; 4.2. The editor-in-chief must evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship, social status, or political preferences; 4.3. Unpublished data from submitted manuscripts must not be used for personal purposes or shared with third parties without the author’s written consent. Information or ideas obtained during editing that could provide advantages must remain confidential and not be used for personal gain; 4.4. The editor-in-chief must not allow the publication of information if there are sufficient grounds to suspect it is plagiarized; 4.5. The editor-in-chief is committed to:

  • Continuously improving the serial scientific publication;
  • Upholding the principle of freedom of opinion;
  • Striving to meet the needs of readers and authors of the serial scientific publication;
  • Excluding the influence of business or political interests on decisions about publishing materials;
  • Deciding on the publication of materials based on the following key criteria: alignment of the manuscript with the serial scientific publication’s theme; relevance, novelty, and scientific significance of the article; clarity of presentation; accuracy of results and completeness of conclusions. The quality and relevance of the research form the basis for the publication decision;
  • Taking all reasonable measures to ensure high-quality published materials and protect the confidentiality of personal information;
  • Considering reviewers’ recommendations when making the final decision on publication. Responsibility for the publication decision rests entirely with the editorial board of the serial scientific publication;
  • Justifying the decision in case of acceptance or rejection of an article;
  • Providing the author of the reviewed material an opportunity to substantiate their research position;
  • Not overturning the previous editorial board’s decisions on publication material when the board’s composition changes. 4.6. The editor-in-chief, together with the publisher, must not ignore complaints regarding reviewed manuscripts or published materials and, in the event of a conflict, take all necessary measures to restore violated rights.

5. Guiding Principles for Publishing Articles

5.1. Adherence to publishing ethics by the editorial board; 5.2. Adherence to guiding principles when rejecting articles; 5.3. Maintaining the integrity of academic writing; 5.4. Preventing harm to intellectual and ethical norms in the presence of commercial interests; 5.5. Readiness to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when necessary; 5.6. Preventing the publication of plagiarism and fraudulent data.

6. Conflict of Interest

To avoid breaches of publication ethics, conflicts of interest among all parties involved in the manuscript publication process must be excluded. A conflict of interest arises when an author, reviewer, or editorial board member has financial, scientific, or personal relationships that could influence their actions. Such relationships are referred to as dual obligations, competing interests, or competing loyalties.

To prevent conflicts of interest and in accordance with the ethical norms of the serial scientific publication, the following duties are imposed on each party:

The Editor Must:

  • Transfer the manuscript for review to another editorial board member if the initially assigned reviewer has a conflict of interest with the author of the submitted manuscript;
  • Request information from all participants in the manuscript publication process about the possibility of competing interests;
  • Decide on the publication of information provided by the author in a cover letter regarding conflicts of scientific and/or financial interests, if it is not confidential and may influence the evaluation of the published work by readers or the scientific community;
  • Ensure the publication of corrections if information about a conflict of interest is received after the article’s publication.

The Author Must:

  • Indicate their place of work and the source of research funding.

The Reviewer Must:

  • Inform the editor-in-chief of any conflict of interest (dual obligations, competing interests) and decline to review the manuscript.

Violations In the event of a situation involving a breach of publication ethics by an editor, author, or reviewer, a mandatory investigation is required. This applies to both published and unpublished materials. The editorial board must request clarification without involving individuals who may have a conflict of interest with any party.

If material containing significant inaccuracies has been published, it must be corrected immediately in a form accessible to readers and indexing systems.

Новый номер

Вариант. I 2024