Ethics

The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the Moscow University Economics Bulletin are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines, and requirements for peer-reviewed journals, elaborated by the "Elsevier" Publishing House.

Duties of Editors

1. The editorial board of the Moscow University Economics Bulletin is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The editors are guided by the editorial policies (incl. scope and goals of the journal, author guidelines, peer-review policy), the decisions of the journal's editorial board, and constrained by legal requirements.
2. An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
3. The editor and the editorial staff of the Moscow University Economics Bulletin must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
4. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal benefit.
5. Editors must not approve the paper if there is sufficient reason to believe that it represents a plagiarism case or redundant self-citation.
6. An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.

Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or another member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors

1. Authors of reports of original research submitted to the Moscow University Economics Bulletin should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.
2. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works and this manuscript has not been already published or submitted to any other journal. The authors should contact the editors of the Moscow University Economics Bulletin and withdraw their paper if they intend to submit it to another journal publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
3. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
4. References should be limited to the sources which have been actually used for the research. Each entry in the reference list must be cited (or quoted) in text.
5. Authors should form the information basis of the research with respectful and official sources which they should reference in the paper.
6. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.
7. Plagiarism in all its form is ethically unacceptable (such practices as copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper without attribution and claiming results from research conducted by others are recognized as plagiarism).
8. In case of discovering a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of the Moscow University Economics Bulletin and cooperate with the publisher to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or another substantive conflict of interest that might influence the results or their interpretation. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Duties of Reviewers

1. The Moscow University Economics Bulletin uses a "double-blind" peer-review approach. This means reviewers do not know the identity of the authors, and the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.
2. Reviewers should express an expert opinion on the validity, quality and originality of the research, and the value of the findings. Peer review aims to assist the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
3. Reviewers provide their expert opinion on a voluntary and gratuitous basis.
4. The reviewer should evaluate only manuscripts that correspond to their area of scientific and professional interests.
5. Any manuscript received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal benefit.
6. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Criticism on the authors’ personalities is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
7. The expert opinion must be fair: the difference in scientific positions of the author and the reviewer could be the basis for a scientific discussion, but it cannot be a substantial reason for rejecting the paper.
8. Reviewers should call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper that has not been properly cited by the authors.
9. Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the manuscript should notify the editor of the Moscow University Economics Bulletin and excuse themself from the review process.
10. If the reviewers cannot provide their review in time, they should contact the editor to excuse themselves from the review process or arrange a new review date.

Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in case they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. Reviewers should notify the editor about the conflict of interest as soon as the relevant circumstances became known.

Violations and liability:

1. A violation of the publication ethics by an author at and stage of the manuscript revealed is a sufficient reason for rejecting the paper at any stage of the consideration.
2. A violation of the publication ethics by a reviewer or editor is a sufficient reason for the journal to stop the cooperation.
3. In accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation, it is the authors’ responsibility to get the rights to use the data for open publication.
4. A violation of the publication ethics revealed in a published paper should be examined following the recommendations of the editorial board. Minor violations can be corrected with the prompt publication of retraction, explanation, or other relevant notes. Hard violations lead to the withdrawal of the paper with notification at the journal webpage.

Any ethical complaint should be investigated with the participation of all parties involved. Until such a violation of the publication ethics has confirmed, any case should be considered as a suspected violation. Each case must be considered by the editorial board of the journal.