Publication Ethics

The Editorial Board of the scientific journal “International Journal of Montology Studies” follows the principles of publication ethics accepted by the international scientific community, including the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

To prevent unethical practices in scholarly publishing (including plagiarism, presentation of unreliable information, fabrication, falsification of research results, and other violations), ensure the high quality of scientific publications, and maintain public trust in published research, all participants involved in the publishing process — including members of the Editorial Board, authors, reviewers, publishers, and affiliated institutions — are required to follow ethical standards, principles, and rules and take all necessary measures to prevent their violation.

Compliance with publication ethics principles by all participants contributes to protecting authors’ intellectual property rights, improving the quality of scientific publications, and preventing the improper use of academic materials.

Authors whose articles contain proven violations of scientific ethics principles, standards, and norms will not be allowed to submit manuscripts to the journal for a period of three calendar years from the date the violation is identified.

 

1. Publication Ethics Principles for Authors 

By submitting a manuscript to the “International Journal of Montology Studies”, the author(s) acknowledge responsibility for the originality, accuracy, and quality of the research results and agree to follow the following principles:

1.1. Authors must provide accurate results of their research. Deliberately incorrect, false, or fabricated statements are unacceptable.

1.2. Authors must guarantee that the research results presented in the manuscript are original. Any borrowed materials, text fragments, ideas, or statements must be properly cited with clear references to the author and the original source. Excessive borrowing, plagiarism in any form, including improper citations or appropriation of the results of other researchers, is considered unethical and unacceptable.

1.3. Authors must present only authentic facts and information, avoid fabrication and falsification of data, and must not use privately obtained information without appropriate permission.

1.4. Authors must avoid duplicate publication. If parts of the manuscript have been previously published, authors must provide references to the earlier work and clearly indicate the differences between the new manuscript and the previous publication.

1.5. Authors must not submit manuscripts that are under consideration by another journal or articles that have already been published elsewhere.

1.6. Authors must acknowledge the contributions of all individuals who have significantly influenced the research process and provide references to works that were important for conducting the study.

1.7. Authors must follow ethical standards when criticizing or discussing the research of other scholars.

1.8. All individuals who have made a significant contribution to the research should be listed as co-authors. Individuals who did not participate in the research should not be included as co-authors.

1.9. Authors must respect the work of the Editorial Board and reviewers, address identified shortcomings, or provide well-justified explanations.

1.10. Authors must prepare and format manuscripts according to the journal’s submission requirements.

1.11. If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their article during the review process or after publication, they must immediately notify the journal’s Editorial Office.

 

2. Ethical Principles for Reviewers

Reviewers conduct scientific evaluations of submitted manuscripts; therefore, their activities must be based on the principles of objectivity, confidentiality, and professional responsibility.

2.1. A manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document and must not be shared with third parties without authorization from the Editorial Office.

2.2. Reviewers must recognize that submitted manuscripts are the intellectual property of authors and contain confidential information that must not be disclosed.

2.3. Reviewers should inform the Editor-in-Chief about significant or partial similarities between the reviewed manuscript and other published works, as well as cases where previously published ideas, conclusions, or arguments have not been properly cited.

2.4. Reviewers should identify important published works that have not been cited by the authors.

2.5. Reviewers should indicate relevant scientific works that could have influenced the research results but were not considered by the authors.

2.6. If reviewers have sufficient grounds to believe that a manuscript contains plagiarism, improper borrowing, false information, fabricated data, or falsified research results, they must inform the journal’s Editorial Office and should not recommend publication until the violations are addressed.

2.7. Reviewers must provide objective and well-argued evaluations of research results. Personal criticism of authors is unacceptable.

2.8. Reviewers’ comments and recommendations should be objective, constructive, and aimed at improving the scientific quality of the manuscript.

2.9. Reviewers must base their decisions on specific evidence and provide clear justification for their recommendations.

2.10. Reviewers are not permitted to make copies of manuscripts for personal use.

2.11. Reviewers must not use information obtained from unpublished manuscripts for their own benefit.

2.12. Reviewers who do not have sufficient expertise to evaluate a manuscript or who cannot provide an objective assessment due to a conflict of interest with the author(s) or affiliated organization must inform the Editorial Office and withdraw from the review process.

2.13. Review reports are confidential. The identity of reviewers is known only to the Managing Secretary and the Editor-in-Chief and is not disclosed.

 

Conflict of Interest

According to the definition of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), a conflict of interest occurs when authors, reviewers, or members of the Editorial Board have personal, financial, professional, or other interests that may influence their judgment regarding the publication of a manuscript.

The Managing Editor of the journal requires all participants in the publication process to disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

The Editor, members of the Editorial Board, and reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may affect editorial decisions regarding manuscript publication.

Editorial Board members must decline participation in the evaluation of manuscripts if they have competitive relationships, collaborative relationships, or any other circumstances that may affect the objectivity of the review process.

When submitting a manuscript, authors must disclose all sources of research funding and indicate any commercial, financial, personal, or professional factors that may create a conflict of interest regarding the submitted manuscript.

Reviewers must not evaluate manuscripts where conflicts of interest may arise from competition, collaboration, or other relationships with any of the authors.

If a conflict of interest is identified, the Managing Editor must inform the Editor, who will assign the manuscript to another editor or reviewer.

The existence of a conflict of interest between participants in the review and publication process does not automatically mean that a manuscript will be rejected.

All participants in the publication process should, whenever possible, avoid conflicts of interest at all stages of publication. If any conflict of interest or other violation of publication and research ethics principles is identified, the relevant party must immediately notify the journal’s Editorial Office.