Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

All research activities must respect fundamental ethical principles. These principles include the need to ensure the freedom of research and protect the physical and moral integrity of individuals and the welfare of animals.

Ethics is integral to research from beginning to end, and ethical compliance is pivotal to achieving absolute research excellence. There is a clear need to make a thorough ethical evaluation from the conceptual stage of the publication to respect the legal framework and enhance the quality of the research. Ethical research entails applying fundamental ethical principles and legislation to scientific research across all domains.

The editorial board of the "Proceedings of the Institute of Electrodynamics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine" adheres to international ethical guidelines for scholarly publications, including principles of integrity, confidentiality, oversight of publications, and the prevention of potential conflicts of interest.

The editorial board of the ‘Proceedings of the Institute of Electrodynamics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine’ adheres to the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, the best publishing practices of OASPA (Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association), the European Association of Science Editors (EASE), the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and adheres to the principles of DORA (San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment), whilst also drawing on the experience of reputable international publishers regarding ethical policy and the prevention of misconduct. Misconduct includes data fabrication, plagiarism, and breaches of confidentiality. The publisher and the editor-in-chief will consider each case, and in all instances, the author (or reviewer) will be contacted directly. However, the publisher reserves the right to contact the author’s or reviewer’s institution or another relevant organization directly if serious misconduct is suspected.

Note that if misconduct is suspected during the review process, the manuscript will be held until any concerns have been resolved. The manuscript will be immediately rejected if misconduct is confirmed during the review process. If misconduct is proven after publication, then the article will be retracted.

Proceedings of the Institute of Electrodynamics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and taking all possible measures against publication malpractice. Authors who submit papers to the Proceedings of the Institute of Electrodynamics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine attest that their work is original and unpublished and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. In addition, authors confirm that their paper is their own; that it has not been copied or plagiarized, in whole or in part, from other works; and that they have disclosed actual or potential conflicts of interest with their work or partial benefits associated with it.

Duties of Editors

Fair play and editorial independence

Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively based on their academic merit (importance, originality, study's validity, clarity) and their relevance to the journal's scope, without regard to the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content. 

Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff will 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.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their research purposes without the author's explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.

Publication decisions

The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers who are experts in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers' comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

Editors (in conjunction with the publisher and/or society) will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. The Proceedings of the Institute of Electrodynamics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine editors follow the COPE Flowcharts when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct. If the ethical concern is well-founded in the investigation, a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other relevant note will be published in the journal.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is essential to formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific endeavor. The Proceedings of the Institute of Electrodynamics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to the scientific process must do a fair share of reviewing.

Promptness

Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This also applies to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.

Acknowledgment of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. Any statement that is an observation, derivation, or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be confidential and not used for the reviewer's advantage. This also applies to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective, and comprehensive, while editorial 'opinion' or perspective pieces should be clearly identified. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality and plagiarism

Authors should ensure that they have written and submitted only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution) to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Proceedings of the Institute of Electrodynamics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine accept only original scientific manuscripts that have not been published before and have not been submitted for publication in other journals.

The manuscript is checked for plagiarism using the Unicheck service. If more than 15% of the borrowed text or any form of plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) is detected, the manuscript is returned to the authors with the possibility of resubmission after proofreading.

Multiple, duplicate, redundant, or concurrent submission/publication

Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and unacceptable.

The publication of some kinds of articles in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Authorship of the manuscript

Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, and general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author but should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list and verify that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Authors should—at the earliest stage possible (generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript)—disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers' bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number, if any).

Acknowledgment of sources

Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from a conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained when providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.

Peer review

Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors' requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "revisions necessary", authors should respond to the reviewers' comments systematically, point by point, and on time, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline.

Fundamental errors in published works

When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work, they must promptly notify the journal's editors or publisher and cooperate with them to correct the paper in the form of an erratum or retract it. Suppose the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy. In that case, the author should promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.

Duties of the Publisher

Handling of unethical publishing behavior

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification, or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work.  The publisher and the editors shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to occur.

Procedure for handling complaints regarding breaches of academic integrity and publication ethics

All reports of potential breaches (plagiarism, self-plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, improper authorship, duplicate publication, conflict of interest, manipulation of the peer review process, etc.) are considered regardless of the stage of the editorial process – both before and after the publication of the article.

Complaints must be submitted in writing to the editorial office, stating the nature of the violation and, where possible, providing supporting evidence. Once the complaint has been registered, the editor-in-chief initiates a preliminary review; if necessary, an expert committee is formed comprising members of the editorial board or independent specialists. The author(s) of the article must be informed of the nature of the complaints and allowed to provide reasoned explanations within a specified timeframe. A decision is made based on a comprehensive analysis of the materials, with the principles of impartiality and confidentiality taken into account.

Following the review, the editorial board may: reject the complaint as unfounded; recommend editorial or authorial amendments; publish a statement of concern; or initiate a full retraction of the article.

Retraction of scientific articles

Retraction of scientific articles (or retraction) is used to correct published information, withdraw it, and notify the scientific community about this step. This procedure is an important element in ensuring the quality of materials and academic integrity.

Reasons for retraction of an article: plagiarism or unauthorized borrowing of materials; duplication of publication (an article is published in several editions without proper reference); falsification or fabrication (falsification) of experimental data; identification of significant errors in the study that make its results incorrect; incorrect authorship; violation of publication ethics (for example, submission of material for publication that has not passed the review stage).

Retraction procedure:

1. Initiation: A retraction can be initiated by authors, the journal editorial board, readers or authorized persons.

2. Consideration: The initiator submits a written application with justification of the reasons and evidence, which is considered by the editor-in-chief and/or a specially created commission of independent experts.

3. Decision: Depending on the nature of the violation, the commission may: - Reject the request for retraction. - Suggest that the authors publish a correction (correction) instead of a full retraction. - Recommend a full retraction of the article.

4. Registration: In the event of a retraction, the article is not removed from the journal archive, but: - A watermark or a mark “Retracted” is applied to the electronic version indicating the date of retraction. - A separate notice of retraction is published with bibliographic data of the original article and detailed justification of the reasons.