ISSN (Online) 2712-8407
DOI: 10.22405/2712-8407

Publication ethics and retraction of articles

Editorial Board of the online publication "Tula Scientific Bulletin. History. Linguistics" adheres to the principles of publication ethics accepted by the international community and considers the experience of authoritative international journals and publishing houses.


1.1. Publication in peer-reviewed journals is not only a simple way of scientific communication, but it also makes a significant contribution to the development of the relevant field of scientific knowledge. Thus, it is important to set standards for the future ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the publication, namely Authors, Journal Editors, Reviewers, Publishers and Scientific Society for the journal “Tula Scientific Bulletin. History. Linguistics”

1.2. The publisher not only supports scientific communication and invests in the process, but is also responsible for ensuring that all up-to-date guidelines in the published work followed.

1.3. The publisher commits to the strictest oversight of scientific contributions. Our journal outlines provide an impartial " report " on the development of scientific thought and research, so we are also aware of our responsibility to properly present these " reports ", especially in terms of the ethical aspects of publications as set out herein.

2. Responsibilities of the Editors

2.1. Decision to publish

Editor of the journal “Tula Scientific Bulletin. History. Linguistics" is personally and independently responsible for the decision to publish, often in collaboration with the relevant Scientific Society. The credibility of the work in question and its scientific significance should always form the basis of the decision to publish. The Editor may be guided by the policy of the Editorial Board of the journal “Tula Scientific Bulletin. History. Linguistics", being limited by the current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright, legality and plagiarism.

The Editor may confer with the other Editors and Reviewers (or Scientific society staff) during the decision-making process for publication.

2.2. Integrity

The Editor should evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, nationality or political preferences of the Authors.

2.3. Privacy

The Editor and Editorial Board of the journal "Tula Scientific Bulletin. History. Linguistics" are obliged not to disclose information about the accepted manuscript to all persons, except the Authors, Reviewers, possible Reviewers, other scientific advisors and the Publisher.

2.4. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest

2.4.1. Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for review must not be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or insights gained during the review process and related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts (namely by requesting a Co-Editor, Associate Editor or collaborating with other members of the Editorial Board in reviewing the work instead of reviewing and deciding for themselves) where there are conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with Authors, companies and possibly other organizations associated with the manuscript.

2.5. Overseeing publications

An editor who has provided convincing evidence that the assertions or conclusions presented in the publication are erroneous should inform the Publisher (and/or the relevant Scientific society) with a view to prompt notification of changes, withdrawal of the publication, expressions of concern and other appropriate statements of the situation.

2.6. Involvement and cooperation in research

The Editor together with the Publisher (or the Scientific Society) take adequate response measures in case of ethical complaints concerning manuscripts or published material reviewed. Such measures generally involve engaging with the Authors of the manuscript and arguing the relevant complaint or claim, but may also involve engaging with relevant organizations and research centers.

3. Responsibilities of Reviewers

3.1. Influencing the decisions of the Editorial Board

Reviewing helps the Editor to decide on publication and through appropriate interaction with Authors can also help the Author to improve the quality of the work. Reviewing is a necessary link in formal scientific communications and is at the "heart" of the scientific approach. The Publisher shares the view that all scholars who would like to contribute to a publication are obliged to do the essential work of reviewing the manuscript.

3.2. Promptness

Any selected Reviewer who feels insufficiently qualified to review the manuscript or who does not have sufficient time to complete the work quickly should notify the Editor of the “Tula Scientific Bulletin. History. Linguistics" and ask to be excluded from the review process of the respective manuscript.

3.3. Privacy

Any manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. This work should not be opened and discussed with anyone not authorized by the Editor.

3.4. Manuscript requirements and objectivity

The reviewer is obliged to give an objective assessment. Subjective personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their opinions clearly and reasonably.

3.5. Primary source identification

Reviewers should identify significant published work relevant to the topic and not included in the bibliography to the manuscript. Any statement previously published should have an appropriate bibliographic citation in the manuscript. The Reviewer should also bring to the attention of the Editor any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published work within the Reviewer's area of expertise.

3.6. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest

3.6.1. Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for review must not be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or insights gained during the review process and related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

3.6.2. Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts where there are conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organisations associated with the submitted work.

4. Responsibilities of Authors

4.1. Manuscript requirements

4.1.1. Authors of papers on original scientific research should provide reliable results of the work done, as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the research. The data underlying the work should be presented without error. The work should contain sufficient evidence, reasoning and bibliographic references for possible reproduction. False or deliberately erroneous statements are perceived as unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

4.1.2. Reviews and biographical articles should also be accurate and objective.

4.2. Data access and storage

Raw data relevant to the manuscript may be requested from Authors for review by the Editors.

4.3. Originality and plagiarism

4.3.1 Authors should ensure that all original work is submitted and, where works or statements by other Authors are used, should provide appropriate bibliographic references or excerpts.

4.3.2 Plagiarism can exist in many forms, from presenting someone else's work as their own, to copying or paraphrasing essential parts of someone else's work (without acknowledgment of authorship), to claiming their own rights to the results of someone else's research. All forms of plagiarism are unethical and unacceptable.

4.4. Abundance, redundancy and simultaneity of publications

4.4.1. In a general case, an Author should not publish a manuscript, substantially dealing with the same research, in more than one journal as an original publication. Submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is perceived as unethical behaviour and unacceptable.

4.4.2. In general, an Author should not submit a previously published article to another journal for consideration.

4.4.3. Publication of a certain type of article (e.g. translated articles) in more than one journal is in some cases ethical under certain conditions. Authors and Editors of the journals concerned must agree to a secondary publication presenting necessarily the same data and interpretations as in the originally published work.

The bibliography of the primary work should also be provided in the second publication.

4.5. Primary source identification

The contributions of other people should always be acknowledged. Authors should refer to publications that are relevant to the work being presented. Data obtained privately, e.g. through conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties, should not be used or presented without the clear written permission of the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources, such as manuscript evaluations or grants, should not be used without the clear written permission of the authors of the work relating to confidential sources.

4.6. Authorship of publication

4.6.1 Only persons who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the submitted research may be authors of a publication. All those who have made a significant contribution should be designated as Co-Authors.

4.6.2. The author must ensure that all participants who have made a substantial contribution to the study are represented as Contributors and that those who have not participated in the study are not listed as Contributors, that all Contributors have seen and approved the final version of the work and have agreed to submit it for publication.

4.7. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest

4.7.1. All Authors are required to disclose in their manuscripts financial or other existing conflicts of interest that may be perceived to have influenced the results or conclusions presented in the work.

4.7.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that must be disclosed include employment, consultancy, share ownership, receipt of fees, provision of expert advice, patent application or registration, grants and other financial support. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed as early as possible.

4.8. Significant errors in published papers

If the Author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the publication, the Author should inform the Editor of the journal "Tula Scientific Bulletin. History. Linguistics" and work with the Editor to withdraw the publication or correct the errors as soon as possible. If the Editor or the Publisher is informed by a third party that the publication contains material errors, the Author is obliged to withdraw the work or correct the errors as soon as possible.

Article Retraction

Retraction (withdrawal) of an article is a procedure of correcting published information and notifying readers that the publication contains serious flaws or erroneous data that cannot be trusted.

    Reasons for article retraction from the Journal:
  • detection of incorrect borrowings (plagiarisms) in the publication;
  • multiplicity of article publication in several editions;
  • detection of direct falsifications or fabrications in the work (for example, juggling of data);
  • detection of significant errors in the article, which casts doubt on its scientific value;
  • incorrect composition of the Authors’ team (absence of one who is worthy to be an Author or inclusion of persons not related to authorship);
  • the presence of a hidden conflict of interest (or other violations of publication ethics).

The procedure of retracting (withdrawal) an article is carried out at the official request of the author (authors), the Editorial Board of the journal, Commission of the Russian Academy of Sciences on Countering Falsification of Research, as well as after an internal examination of the Journal.

If the Editorial Board decides to retract (withdraw) the article on the basis of its own internal expertise or information received by the Editorial Board, the Editorial Board informs the author/authors of this decision with the obligatory justification for retracting the article.

After making a decision on retraction (withdrawal) of the article, the Editorial Board indicates the reason for the retraction, as well as the date of retraction. The article and the description of the article remain on the website of the Journal as part of the corresponding issue of the Journal, but the electronic version of the text is marked with the inscription ОТОЗВАНА/RETRACTED and the date of retraction.

The author/authors may not agree with the decision of the Editorial Board, but this does not deprive them of the right to conduct a retraction procedure.

    Decisions of the Editorial Board on retraction (retraction, recall) of the article are sent to:
  • to the Scientific Electronic Library (in this case, the withdrawn articles and references from them are excluded from the RSCI and they do not participate in the calculation of indicators);
  • to the CyberLeninka Scientific Electronic Library;

Information about the retracted articles Information about the retracted articles