General duties and responsibilities of the parties

General duties and responsibilities of the parties

"Ukrainian Journal of Sinology Studies" is committed to meeting and upholding standards of ethical behaviour at all stages of the publication process. We closely follow the standards and principles for best practices in order to meet these requirements. Below is a summary of our key requirements for editors, reviewers, authors, readers.

Duties and responsibilities of the Editorial Board

  • Editors are responsible for everything published in their journal:
  • Editors act in a balanced, objective and fair way while carrying out their duties, without discrimination on the grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors.
  • All articles are considered and accepted solely on the basis of their academic merit, without commercial influence, being faithful to the principles of Publication Ethics;
  • Editorial Board quickly responds to any complaints of ethical or conflict nature, on the work of the journal and guarantees a solution of all problem situations. Editors are always ready to post corrections, explanations and apologies when it’s necessary. The editors provide authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to any complaints. All complaints are investigated no matter when the original publication was approved. All documents associated with such complaints are stored.
  • Editors take into account the suggestions of readers, reviewers and members of the editorial board how to improve the work of the journal.
  • During the editorial and publishing process, the editorial staff provides technical and informational support to journal users.
  • The Editors guarantee the confidentiality of materials submitted to the journal during the entire editorial and publishing process, takes into account the provisions of the Law of Ukraine "On Protection of Personal Data" and the general rules of the General Data Protection Regulation.
  • Editors try to fulfil the needs of readers and authors.

 Cooperation with Reviewers

  • The edition publishes full requirements for reviewers and provides reviewers with detailed instructions on the work in the journal. The review process is clearly described on the journal website.
  • Reviewers assist in improving the quality of the published paper by reviewing the manuscript objectively, in a timely manner. The review process is fair, objective, unbiased and timely.
  • Editorial Board asks the reviewer to note the presence of a possible conflict of interest before he would agree to review the material submitted to him. All judgments and conclusions in the review process must be objective; reviewers should not have conflict of the interests.
  • Editorial Board asks reviewers to report all cases of plagiarism, to notify the editor of any published or posted content that is similar to the article.
  • Reviewers do not have the right to disclose the information specified in the manuscripts prior to publication to protect the confidentiality of any information shared by the editor or author. Reviewers can not store or copy the manuscript. Reviewers should give as examples of their recommendations those studies that have already been published but have not been quoted yet.
  • The editorial board appreciate the work of reviewers in the journal activities and sends a grateful letter to the reviewers for their contribution to the journal’s work.
  • Editors analyse the quality of reviewers' work and check that the review process is at a high level. Ensures that all reviewers’ qualification corresponds to the level of professional edition, and if necessary, change their structure.
  • The editorial board stops cooperation with the reviewers who provide reviews of poor quality or with a constant delay.
  • The editors use a number of sources to identify potential reviewers (authors' suggestions, specific databases). The editorial board develops and checks the database of relevant reviewers and constantly updates it on the basis of an analysis of the results of reviewers' work.
  • The editorial board adapts the review process to the needs of the users and provides an opportunity for each reviewer to check the article in the most convenient way for him.
  • The editorial board informs the authors of all comments about their work, made by reviewers, unless they contain unacceptable remarks;

  Cooperation with Authors

  • The editorial board provides authors with detailed instructions and a description regarding the editorial and publishing process. In case of any deviation from the described process, the editors provide the author with explanations. The editorial board informs the time of receiving materials and publication dates of issues.
  • Editors publish full requirements for the authors. These requirements are updated regularly. Clearly described the criteria used to determine who can be considered the author of the article and who can be considered as contributing person in accordance with established standards.
  • Editorial Board defines the criteria for evaluation of materials and carries out the selection of reviewers for each manuscript (person who is able to provide a competent evaluation of the work and who has not any conflict of interest); The authors are provided with detailed description of the review process, in case of any deviations from the described process, editors are obliged to provide an explanation to the author. The Editorial Board reserves the right to minor literary editor and correction, while preserving the author's style.
  • Editor decision of acceptance/rejection of the manuscript is based on its relevance, originality, relevance to the scientific direction and the requirements of the journal.
  • If the manuscript contains many controversial factors (such as negative response of the reviewers about quality of articles, the article is not finalized by author, taking into account the reviewers' comments etc.), the editors can not approve it for publication.
  • If the author disagrees with the editorial decision, it is declared the appeal mechanism to the Editorial Board of the journal (The review process. Appeal procedure.).
  • New editors are not allowed to reverse the decision to publish articles made by former editors unless serious issues are identified in the publication.
  • At the request of the author the manuscript can be removed from consideration and archived in the journal (with the consequent possibility of recovery in the queue). To do this, the author should contact the editor with your request.
  • Authors should maintain accurate records of data associated with their submitted manuscript, and to supply or provide access to these data, on reasonable request. Where appropriate and where allowed by employer, funding body and others who might have an interest, to deposit data in a suitable repository or storage location, for sharing and further use by others.
  • Authors should confirm/assert that the manuscript as submitted is not under consideration or accepted for publication elsewhere. Where portions of the content overlap with published or submitted content, to acknowledge and cite those sources. Additionally, to provide the editor with a copy of any submitted manuscript that might contain overlapping or closely related content.
  • Authors should confirm that all the work in the submitted manuscript is original and to acknowledge and cite content reproduced from other sources. 
  • Authors should to make changes to the manuscript and correct any found errors.
  • Authors should  declare any potential conflicts of interest (e.g. where the author has a competing interest (real or apparent) that could be considered or viewed as exerting an undue influence on his or her duties at any stage during the publication process).
  • Authors should notify promptly the journal editor or publisher if a significant error in their publication is identified. To cooperate with the editor and publisher to publish an erratum, addendum, corrigendum notice, or to retract the paper, where this is deemed necessary.
  • Editors use COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) requirements in the case of any arguments about authorship, and publish information on how to resolve conflicting issues.
  • The editorial board respects and takes into account the authors' wishes that a person should not review their work if they are justified and appropriate.
  • Authors should ensure that any studies involving human or animal subjects conform to national, local and institutional laws and requirements (e.g. WMA Declaration of Helsinki, NIH Policy on Use of Laboratory Animals, EU Directive on Use of Animals) and confirm that approval has been sought and obtained where appropriate. Authors should obtain express permission from human subjects and respect their privacy.

  Cooperation with Readers

  • The editorial board ensures that readers are properly informed and distributed about the content that has just been published.
  • The editorial board ensures that all published scientific materials have been reviewed and reviewed by qualified experts and specialists.
  • Readers are informed about who funded the research or any other scientific work, as well as the role of the sponsors in the research and in the publication of its results.
  • Editors use procedures that promote the accuracy, completeness and clarity of the research presentation, including technical editing and use of relevant manuals and process charts;
  • The editorial staff develops a transparency policy and provides maximum disclosure of articles.
  • The Editorial Board informs readers of the steps taken to ensure that all articles (including articles by magazine staff or editorial board members) receive an objective and impartial evaluation.

Cooperation with Editors

  • The Editorial Board provides readers with relevant information and provides readers with newsletters and information on content that has just been published;
  • The Editorial Board ensures that all published articles and reviews are reviewed by specialists who have the necessary qualifications;
  • Readers should be informed of who funded the research or any other scientific work, as well as the sponsors who played a role in the research and publication of its findings, and if so, what was the role.
  • The Editorial Board develops a transparency policy, providing the maximum amount of information on the origin of articles;
  • The Editorial Board informs readers of the steps to ensure that all articles (regardless of authorship and articles of the journal staff or editorial board members) receive an objective and impartial evaluation.
  • Editors' relationships with publishers and magazine owners are firmly based on the independence of editors.
  • Editors decide which articles are published solely on the basis of their quality and closeness to the subject matter of the journal without the intervention of the journal owner/publisher.
  • The relationship between the journal owner/publisher and the editors is clearly stated in the signed contract. The terms of this contract are consistent with the Code of Conduct for COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) editors.
  • Editors regularly exchange information with the publisher to improve the journal's performance.