Publication ethics is understood as a system of professional behavior’ standard in the relationship between authors, reviewers and editors in the process of creating, selecting, publishing and distributing articles.

The most perceptible instances of misconduct include plagiarism, duplicate submission, misappropriation of research results, fraud, and attributing authorship. The Editorial team Journal “BENEFICIUM” denounces all these forms of malpractices. In its activity the Editorial team is guided by the principles of publication ethics based on the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (Guidelines), Elsevier Publishing (Publishing Ethics Resource Kit, PERK) and the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (ASEP) (Scientific Publication Ethics Guidelines) and makes every effort to prevent possible violations.

1. Ethical Principles of Authors:

• the author of an article is the person who was substantially involved in its writing (substantial contributions to the conception or design of the article; the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the article; drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; final approval of the version to be published);
• authors ensure that the list of authors includes only those individuals who have made significant contributions to the article, and that no researcher deserving authorship has been excluded from the list of authors;
• the corresponding author shall guarantee that all the co-authors have seen the final version of the article, approved it, and agreed to its submission for publication in the journal;
• authors guarantee that their work is original (does not contain plagiarism); authors have not used literal or close to literal copying or paraphrasing of the text and results of the research presented in the works of other authors;
• authors guarantee that the submitted article contains authentic results that have never been published and are not being reviewed by other journals; authors must disclose any conflicts of interests that could affect the evaluation and interpretation of their article;
• authors guarantee that the article they submit meets the requirements for formatting;
• the main duty of authors is to present the results of their research as fully and accurately as possible in the article, without misleading the readers and the Editorial team;
• authors are obliged to make references to those works that had the greatest influence on the research, so that the reader can quickly refer to the earlier original research on the problem in question;
• the list of references should contain all the sources that are mentioned by authors in the article;
• authors are required to immediately notify the Editorial team in the event of an error in any work filed by them for publication, accepted for publication, or already published, and contribute to its correction;
• all articles of Journal “BENEFICIUM” are available for reading, downloading, copying, distributing, linking to the full texts, or using for any other lawful purpose under the license Creative Commons Attribution – NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY–NC 4.0);
• when citing an article published in Journal “BENEFICIUM”, the reference should lead to the official page of the article on the journal’ website.

2. Ethical Principles of Reviewers:

• reviewers evaluate the content of articles regardless of the race, gender, religious views, background, citizenship, political views, official position of their authors;
• personal criticism of authors by reviewers is unacceptable;
• reviewers undertake to conduct peer-review of the manuscript objectively; all the conclusions of reviewers should be strictly provided with links to authoritative sources;
• reviewers should indicate, if available, scientific papers that have influenced the results of the article’ study, but were not cited by authors of the article;
• reviewers are obliged to pay attention to the wording substantial similarity or overlap between the article under consideration and the other previously published work, which is known to the reviewer (plagiarism);
• reviewers have no right to use unpublished articles materials in their own research without the express written consent of the author;
• reviewers are obliged to inform about the impossibility of reviewing if in their opinion they are not qualified to review the article or if they are sure that they cannot provide a review in the required time or cannot be objective as a result of a conflict of interests;
• expert evaluation of the article provided by the reviewer, promotes the adoption of editorial decisions, and also helps the author improve the article; on the basis of reviewing results the Editorial team makes a decision on the adoption of the article for publication, return it to the author for revision or rejection of the publication.

3. Ethical principles of the Editorial team:

• the Editorial team recognizes the equality of all authors in their right to publish articles in the Journal “BENEFICIUM” that comply with the pre-published rules for authors;
• interaction of the Editorial team with authors is based on the principles of mutual respect, honesty and transparency;
• the Editorial team publishes information materials for authors (article submission rules, order of consideration of the article, peer-review policy, requirements for the article formatting) on the journal's website;
• articles submitted to the Editorial team are checked for borrowings from open sources (plagiarism) through the “Anti-Plagiarism” database (antiplagiat.ru); should multiple unauthorized borrowings be detected, the Editorial team follows the COPE algorithm;
• articles are accepted for publication on the basis of a positive review by a reviewer;
• the Editorial team maintains the confidentiality of reviewers' personal data;
• the Editorial team ensures independent and conscientious consideration of all submitted articles, without prejudice against ethnic, religious, or social status of their authors and regardless of commercial interests and relations with the founder;
• the Editorial team reserves the right to reject the submitted article on the stages preceding the review, if there are valid reasons for this (the subject of the article does not correspond to the scientific directions of the journal, the article was published earlier, the article contains plagiarism, the article contains obvious signs of low quality, there are numerous stylistic, syntactic, and grammatical errors in the article, the article significantly violated the requirements for the design, the article reveals a fundamental contradiction with the principles of publication ethics) or on the basis of a motivated negative reviewer's opinion;
• the Editorial team ensures that the materials of the rejected article will not be used in the Editorial Board members’ own research without the written consent of the author;
• the Editorial team shall promptly examine each complaint about any possible unethical behavior of authors of submitted and published articles and undertake appropriate measures; should the unethical behaviour be proved;
• the activity of the Editorial team is oriented to openness.

4. Retraction of articles:

• retraction of a published article is considered to be the last resort in case previously unknown facts were revealed after the review stage;
• the Editorial team acts in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (Retraction guidelines) and the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (ASEP) (Council on the Ethics of Scientific Publications);
• the author, reader, reviewer, editor, and publisher can initiate retraction of an article by appealing to the journal Editorial team.