Publication Ethics

INTRODUCTION

This standard sets out the principles and norms of scientific ethics that scientific editors, reviewers, authors of scientific articles, executive secretaries, and members of the Editorial Board of the scientific journal “Oncology and Radiology of Kazakhstan” (hereinafter – the Journal) shall observe in the process of interaction.

The Publishing ethics outlines the moral and ethical aspects of publishing in the scientific journal of the Kazakh Institute of Oncology and Radiology (KazIOR). It establishes the responsibility of all publication process participants.

BACKGROUND

Publishing the results is the final stage of scientific research.

Scientific articles shall deliver detailed information on the research performed. Researchers shall ensure that the publication is honest, clear, accurate, complete, balanced. They shall avoid selective, ambiguous reports that mislead the readers.

REQUIREMENTS TO PUBLISHING ETHICS

In its activity, the Journal Editorial Board is governed by the Code of Responsibility for Research Publication: International Standards for Authors and recommendations of the Committee on Publishing Ethics (COPE).

1. 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

1.1 This standard defines the main principles and norms of publishing ethics in the “Oncology and Radiology of Kazakhstan” scientific journal.

1.2 This standard regulates the relations between the publisher, the editors, Editorial Board members, authors of scientific articles, and reviewers during the publication process.

1.3 This standard defines the norms of behavior for the editors, Editorial Board members, reviewers, and authors, determines the measures to identify conflicts of interest, describes unethical behavior, gives instructions for revocation and retraction of articles, and introducing the corrections.

1.4 This standard was developed under the RK Laws “On Science” and “On Education,” the requirements to scientific editions of the Committee for Control in the Sphere of Education and Science MES RK for their inclusion in the list of editions recommended for publishing the results of scientific activity, the requirements of COPE, Publishing Ethics of Elsevier journal publications, and the Code of Scientific Ethics, the Charter and the Code of Corporate Ethics of KazIOR.

1.5 Each author, editor-in-chief, reviewer, executive secretary, member of the Editorial Board of the “Oncology and Radiology of Kazakhstan” scientific journal shall strictly comply with the principles, norms, and standards of publishing ethics. Compliance with ethical principles is important to ensure the high quality of the Journal publications and building trust and respect between the publication process participants.

2. PUBLISHING ETHICS OF THE PUBLISHER

In its activities, the Journal’s Publisher is governed by the following fundamental principles of publishing ethics. The Publisher:

2.1 Creates conditions for implementing ethical principles by the Editorial Board, editors, reviewers, and authors under the standard of publishing ethics.

2.2 Prevents violations of publishing ethics and supports the journal Editorial Board in reviewing claims.

2.3 Ensures the confidentiality of all information related to the publication process, except for publicly available information, following the editorial policy of the Journal.

2.4 Allows the Editorial Board to freely choose the authors’ works to be published in the journal, observing scientificity, objectivity, and transparency, and basing on the reviewing results.

3. PUBLISHING ETHICS OF THE EDITORIAL BOARD

3.1 The Editorial Board makes the final decision on publishing a manuscript based on the peer review results and examination of the manuscript for compliance with the design requirements.

3.2 In making publishing decisions, the Editorial Board is governed by the journal’s editorial policy. Manuscripts that violate the scientific and/or publishing ethics, copyrights, or plagiarism rules are not allowed for publication.

3.3 The Editorial Board is responsible for making decisions on the publication/rejection of manuscripts submitted by authors.

3.4 The Editorial Board shall revoke an article if there is irrefutable evidence that the data obtained is unreliable and/or obtained as a result of a violation of principles, norms, standards of scientific and/or publishing ethics, or misconduct; experimental errors are found; the article has been previously published in another publication without notifying the Editorial Board; the article contains plagiarism; the article contains information about unethical research.

3.5 The Editorial Board evaluates manuscripts by their intellectual content regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, political views of the author, or any commercial considerations.

3.6 The Editorial Board shall not disclose information about submitted manuscripts to anyone except the corresponding author, potential reviewers, and the publisher. Any manuscript submitted for review is considered confidential. Manuscripts should not be displayed or discussed with external persons.

3.7 The Editorial Board ensures that a rejected manuscript will not be used in the Editorial Board members’ research without the author’s (authors’) written consent.

3.8 The Editorial Board should require all publication process participants to disclose their conflict of interest (if any).

3.9 A member of the Editorial Board has to inform the scientific editor of any conflict of interest with an author of a manuscript. After that, the editor-in-chief delegates the review of the manuscript to another member of the Editorial Board who has no conflict of interest with the author(s) of the manuscript.

3.10 The Editorial Board is entitled to develop and improve the Journal, follow the principles of freedom of opinion, and meet the professional, scientific needs of the Journal’s authors and readers.

3.11 The Editorial Board should avoid an influence of commercial and/or other interests of the author(s), reviewers, and the publisher on making decisions on publication or rejection of a manuscript.

3.12 The Editorial Board is liable for publishing an article with the signs of violation of standards, norms, and principles of scientific and/or publishing ethics, unethical behavior, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, excessive self-citation, and conflict of interest.

3.13 Suppose the Editorial Board or any of its members discovers violations of the standards, norms, and principles of scientific and/or publishing ethics. In that case, the editor-in-chief revokes such an article based on the Editorial Board’s decision.

3.14 If the Editorial Board receives a signed claim (in paper and/or electronic form) from a person (group of persons) indicating their full name(s), contact information (cell phone number, mailing address, and e-mail address) and specifying the fact(s) of violation of the standards, norms, and principles of scientific and/or publishing ethics, unethical behavior of the author(s) of a manuscript or previous publication(s) in the Journal, the Editorial Board shall consider the claim and respond to the claimant(s) in paper and/or electronic form signed by the editor-in-chief or his/her deputy within 30 calendar days from the date of receipt of the claim.

3.15 Claims received anonymously are not considered.

3.16 The Editorial Board shall take reasonable measures concerning the claim(s) received from a person (group of persons) and specifying the fact(s) of violation of standards, norms, and principles of scientific and/or publishing ethics, unethical behavior of the author(s) of manuscripts or articles published in the Journal.

3.17 Suppose the arguments specified in the claim are confirmed. In that case, the Editorial Board is entitled to refuse to publish the manuscript and stop further cooperation with the author(s) on this manuscript or revoke the article previously published in the Journal.

4. PUBLISHING ETHICS OF THE AUTHOR

4.1 The author(s) submit(s) the manuscript to the editorial office and guarantee(s) that it has not been published or submitted to another journal earlier and is not under consideration for publication in another journal.

4.2 Submitting a manuscript for consideration to several journals/publications at a time is not allowed and considered a violation of publishing ethics.

4.3 The author(s) guarantee(s) that the research results presented in the manuscript represent an independent and original work and do not contain improper borrowings (plagiarism).

4.4 If several authors carried out the research described in the manuscript, the main author is the first indicated in the list of authors.

4.5 Persons who have made significant contributions to the study should be listed as co-authors.

4.6 The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors are mentioned in the manuscript.

4.7 All authors mentioned in the manuscript are responsible for its content.

4.8 The corresponding author submits to the Editorial Board the manuscript approved by other co-authors.

4.9 The author(s) is/are liable for submitting a manuscript with the signs of violating the standards, norms, and principles of scientific and/or publishing ethics, unethical behavior, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, excessive self-citation, fabrication, falsification, data misrepresentation, false authorship, false authorship, duplication, conflict of interest, deception.

4.10 Any citation and/or borrowing from another author requires a bibliographical reference indicating the initial source.

4.11 Plagiarism in any form (unformatted quotations, paraphrasing or appropriation of research result(s), text, ideas of other persons) violates ethical principles and is unacceptable.

4.12 In case errors and inaccuracies in the paper are discovered at any stage of the publication process, the author(s¬) shall immediately inform the Editorial Board and eliminate or correct the errors. They shall also publish an Erratum (report of errors) or Corrigendum (corrections) with appropriate comments. In detecting gross errors that cannot be corrected, the author(s) shall revoke the paper.

4.13 The bibliographical list of the manuscript shall correctly indicate all scientific and other sources used in the course of the research and significantly influence the research results stated in the manuscript.

4.14 The author(s) should provide additional materials to prove the ideas, results, and/or facts presented in the manuscript if the reviewer(s), editor-in-chief, or Editorial Board members doubt the authenticity and/or reliability of the research results in question.

4.15 The author(s) should disclose any conflict of interest that may affect the evaluation and interpretation of the manuscript.

4.16 The author(s) shall respect the ethical standards regarding criticism or comments about the research(s), the manuscript, and the interaction with the Editorial Board regarding the review and publication of the manuscript.

4.17 Failure of the author(s) to comply with the ethical principles specified in this section of the standard is considered a gross violation of publishing ethics and provides grounds for withdrawal of the manuscript from reviewing and/or publication.

5. PUBLISHING ETHICS OF THE REVIEWER

5.1 The reviewer shall perform an objective expert evaluation of the manuscript. Personal criticism towards the author(s) is not acceptable.

5.2 The reviewer should rationalize his/her remarks and justify his/her decision to accept or reject the manuscript.

5.3 The reviewer should avoid the influence of the origin of the manuscript, his personal and/or other relations with the author(s) of the manuscript, or commercial considerations on the content of the review.

5.4 The reviewer should remember that his expert opinion will be the basis for making final editorial decisions to publish or reject the manuscript. The review also helps the author to improve the manuscript.

5.5 A manuscript submitted to a reviewer for reviewing should be treated as confidential.

5.6 The reviewer shall not show or discuss a manuscript with other persons without the permission of the chief editor.

5.7 The reviewer should not distribute unpublished manuscripts.

5.8 The reviewer should not use the information and scientific ideas obtained during the reviewing process for personal and/or other benefits.

5.9 The reviewer should give comments and possible improvements to the manuscript.

5.10 The reviewer should draw the Editorial Board’s attention to a significant similarity between the manuscript in question and another previously published paper if the reviewer is aware of such a similarity.

5.11 The reviewer shall not allow the manuscript for publication if there is sufficient evidence that it contains the fact(s) of violation of standards, norms, and principles of scientific and/or publishing ethics, plagiarism, other incorrect borrowings, use of false, fabricated materials or research results.

5.12 The reviewer is obliged to provide a review within the period determined by the Editorial Board. The reviewer shall notify the Editorial Board about the impossibility of making a review within the specified period.

5.13 The reviewer should not review manuscripts that may cause a conflict of interest arising from competition, cooperation, and/or other relations with any authors or institutions related to the manuscript.

5.14 The reviewer who thinks that his/her qualification is insufficient for assessing the manuscript notifies the chief editor immediately and refuses to review the manuscript.

6. COMPLIANCE WITH THE PRINCIPLES, NORMS, AND STANDARDS OF PUBLISHING ETHICS

6.1 Any violation of publishing ethics shall be thoroughly investigated based on the legal norms, the collective agreements governing scientific activities, and ethical norms.

6.2 The principle of confidentiality should be followed when considering the unethical behavior of the publication process participants.

6.3 Anonymous testimonies and statements should not be accepted for consideration if there is no real threat to people or property.

6.4 Ethical conflicts should be resolved through discussion and debate.

6.5 Case(s) of violation of publishing ethics principles and standards should be considered officially according to this Journal’s Publishing ethics.

7. GENERAL PUBLISHING ETHICS REQUIREMENTS

7.1 Validity and reliability

7.1.1 A research is performed following ethical standards and relevant laws.

7.1.2 The researchers shall use appropriate methods of data analysis and display.

7.1.3 The authors accept collective responsibility for their work and the content of the manuscript.

7.1.4 The authors have to carefully check calculations, textual data, and evidence of claims.

7.2 Integrity
7.2.1 The researchers shall present reliable results without manipulating data. Images (micrographs, x-rays, photographs, etc.) shall be presented without correction.
7.2.2 The researchers should strive to describe methods and findings clearly and unambiguously.
7.2.3 The research sponsors cannot veto the publication of results that are not favorable to their products or do not support their opinion (exceptions: studies classified by the government due to safety issues).
7.2.4 The authors should alert the editor immediately if they find an error in a submitted, accepted, or already published paper. The authors should cooperate with the editors in correcting or retracting the published data.
7.2.5 The data referenced by the authors shall be accurately reflected in the citations and references.
7.2.6 The authors should not copy references from other publications if they have not read the cited work.

7.3 Balance
7.3.1 New results should be presented in comparison with the data from previous studies. Other people’s work should be fairly presented. Scientific reviews and syntheses of existing studies should be complete, balanced, and include all conclusions, whether or not they support the hypothesis.

7.3.2 Research limitations should be reflected in publications.

7.4 Originality

7.4.1 The authors are personally responsible for the originality of their work. They ensure the paper has not been published in another publication or another language. The work should not be submitted simultaneously in more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publish. If the articles are co-published, this fact shall be clear to the readers.

7.4.2 Current copyright laws and conventions shall be observed. Copied material (tables, figures, extensive quotations) shall be reproduced, indicating the source.

7.4.3 Previous works and publications by other researchers should be properly cited and referenced. All used literature should be reflected in the list of references.

7.4.4 Data, text, drawings, or ideas provided by other researchers should be attributed to their authors. The original interpretation of data taken from publications of other researchers should be framed as a citation.

7.4.5 Several publications related to a single research project shall refer to each other, and the primary publication is mentioned. Data translations and adaptation for other audiences shall be identified, indicating the original following the relevant copyright conventions and other requirements and permissions. Authors shall obtain permission from the original publisher before republishing any previously published paper.

7.5 Transparency

7.5.1 All sources of research funding, including direct and indirect financial support, the supply of equipment and materials, or other types of assistance (e.g., statistical processing), shall be indicated.

7.5.2 Authors shall disclose to the sponsor (if any) the research, analysis, interpretation, and reporting algorithms.

7.5.3 Authors should indicate financial and non-financial interests and relations that may influence the interpretation of the results. Authors shall follow institutional requirements when disclosing competing interests.

7.6 Authorship and Recognition of Input

7.6.1 Scientific literature aims to acquaint a wide audience with research results and the authors. Therefore, the authorship of scientific publications should accurately reflect each author’s contribution.

7.6.2 All authors who made major, lesser, or purely technical contributions to the research shall be properly listed. Journal editors shall publish and promote the accepted authorship criteria; they may not resolve authorship disputes. The responsibility for authorship rests with the authors.

7.6.3 The researchers shall ensure that the persons included in the list of authors meet the criteria for authorship (have made a substantial contribution to the work). The Journal editors shall prevent “guest,” “gift,” and “ghost” authorship: “guest authors” are those who do not meet the criteria for authorship but are listed because of their seniority, reputation, or perceived influence; “ghost authors” are those who meet the criteria for authorship but are not listed as authors; “gift authors” are those who meet the established criteria for authorship but are listed as a personal favor or in exchange for payment.

7.6.4 The responsible author keeps contact with the editor and other authors, keeps the co-authors informed, and involves them in major publishing-related decisions.

7.6.5 Authors should not use the acknowledgment to describe the contributions of persons not involved in the paper.

7.7 Reporting and Responsibility

7.7.1 All authors shall read and familiarize themselves with the paper and ensure that the publication conforms to the principles outlined in this standard. The authors are jointly liable for the research and reporting integrity. If authors are liable only for certain aspects of the research and reporting, this should be indicated in the manuscript.
7.7.2 The authors should cooperate with the editor or the publisher to make corrections to their paper as quickly as possible if errors or omissions are discovered after publication.
7.7.3 The authors should comply with the relevant conventions, requirements, and rules to make the data available to other researchers who request it. The authors shall follow appropriate Journal standards. The researchers may not require to be indicated as authors for joint use of their materials.
7.7.4 The authors should respond appropriately to comments after publication, published correspondence. They should attempt to answer correspondents’ questions and, if necessary, provide clarification or additional details.

7.8 Reviewing and Publishing

7.8.1 The authors shall follow the prohibition to submit a paper for review to several journals at a time.

7.8.2 The authors shall inform the editor if they withdraw their paper from consideration.

7.8.3 The authors shall respond to the reviewers’ comments in a professional and timely manner.

7.8.4 The authors shall respect the publishers’ requests that prohibit commenting on research results before publication in the Journal. Press releases should accurately reflect the work and should not include statements beyond the research results.

7.9 Reporting of Research Involving Humans or Animals

7.9.1 The IEC’s approval, licensure, or registration shall be obtained before research is initiated; details shall be reported.

7.9.2 At the editors’ request, the authors provide evidence that the research has been approved and performed in compliance with ethical standards (e.g., copies of approvals, licenses).

7.9.3 The researchers shall not publish or share identifying personal data collected in the study without informed consent from the individual (or their representative). The researchers should be aware that many scientific journals are freely available on the Internet and, therefore, should be mindful of the risk of harm (to research participants or their families).

7.9.4 The researchers shall publish all significant results. There is an ethical responsibility to publish the results of all clinical trials. Publishing failed studies or experiments that reject a hypothesis may help prevent other studies (from wasting time and resources on similar designs). Findings from small studies, and those that do not achieve statistically significant results, should be published because they can deliver useful information (e.g., through meta-analysis).

7.9.5 Authors should provide study protocols to the journal editors if required (e.g., when conducting clinical trials). Researchers shall follow the requirements for registration of clinical trials and indicate the study registration number in all publications related to the clinical trial.

8. FORMAL COMPLAINTS BY THE AUTHOR(S) AND THEIR CONSIDERATION

8.1 A complaint of an author(s) (in paper and/or electronic format) shall be signed by the applicant(s) and indicate full name, contact information (cell phone number, mailing address, and e-mail address). A complaint on violation of principles, standards of scientific and/or publishing ethics, and unethical behavior by one or more publication process participants (editors, Editorial Board members, reviewers) is submitted to the Ethical Commission of the Kazakh Research Institute of Oncology and Radiology.

8.2 Anonimous complaints received by the Ethics Commission are not considered.

8.3 A complainant can withdraw a complaint at any stage of its consideration by KazIOR Ethics Commission.

8.4 A participant in the publishing process who has been filed with the Ethics Commission for violation of any publication ethics principle or standard can furnish the Ethical Commission with a signed document refuting the complaint (in paper and/or electronic format) or a signed appeal (in paper and/or electronic format) to the Ethical Commission’s decision.

9. MEASURES TO BE TAKEN IN CASE OF VIOLATION OF PUBLISHING ETHICS

9.1 When the Ethics Commission receives a complaint specifying a violation of any principle or standard of publishing ethics, unethical behavior, the relevant facts shall be immediately investigated under the appropriate procedures; the necessary measures shall be taken impartially. A protocol stating the Ethics Commission decision is prepared based on the investigation results.

9.2 Based on the protocol of the Ethics Commission or in individual cases requiring additional investigations into the violations of the principles and standards of publishing ethics, unethical conduct, KazIOR Deputy Chairman of the Board for Scientific and Strategic Work can appoint a special commission from among the Editorial Board members (except for any complained members) and other specialists in the relevant field of science to investigate any facts of violation of the principles and standards of publishing ethics, unethical behavior specified in the complaint.

9.3 The Special Commission appointed by the Deputy Chairman of the Board of KazIOR for Scientific and Strategic Work has the right and authority to petition the KazIOR Disciplinary Commission for disciplinary action, including reprimand, severe reprimand, demotion, dismissal of a publication process participant (the Journal’s editor-in-chief, members of the editorial board, reviewers) found guilty in a violation of the principles or standards of publishing ethics which is a KaIOR employee at the time of petition before the KazIOR Disciplinary Commission.

10. PROCEDURE FOR CORRECTIONS

10.1 The rules of this standard shall be binding for all publication process participants, including authors of manuscripts and articles published in the Journal, editors, members of the Editorial Board, reviewers of the Journal. The rules may be altered or supplemented due to the changes in regulatory documents and/or measures not covered by this standard.

10.2 Alterations to this standard are made by order of KAzIOR Deputy Chairman of the Board for Scientific and Strategic Work.

11. LIABILITY SHARING

11.1 Each publication process participant, including authors of manuscripts and articles published in the Journal, the Journal’s editor-in-chief, members of the Editorial Board, reviewers, and other persons involved in the publication of a manuscript, are personally liable for fulfillment and adherence to the principles, norms or standards of publishing ethics specified herein.

11.2 Each member of the KazIOR Ethics Commission is liable for taking necessary measures if a violation of the principle(s) of publishing ethics or unethical behavior is detected.

11.3 Each author of a manuscript should be governed by the need to strictly comply with the principles of publishing ethics and follow them in good faith at all stages of submitting a manuscript for publication.

12. FINAL PROVISIONS

The fulfillment of this standard is followed up by KazIOR Deputy Chairman of the Board for Scientific and Strategic Work.

13. GLOSSARY (TERMS AND DEFINITIONS)

1. Publishing ethics is a system of norms of professional behavior of the publication process participants: authors, reviewers, editor-in-chief, Editorial Board members, and publisher when creating, distributing, and using scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals.
   2. Scientific ethics is the range of the norms of behavior established and recognized by the scientific collaboration, the rules of ethical behavior of scientists engaged in scientific and research activities.
   3. Principles of scientific ethics are the principles of scientific honesty in presenting scientific research results. Scientific honesty is the basis for scientific ethics.
   4. Scientific journal is a periodical that publishes peer-reviewed results of theoretical and applied research for scientific, higher-education teaching personnel and students and a wide range of readers.
   5. A publisher is a legal entity that publishes scientific journals. The scientific journal “Oncology and Radiology of Kazakhstan” is published by the Kazakh Institute of Oncology and Radiology.
   6. Unethical practices are the practices of one or more publication process participants (author, publisher, editor-in-chief, Editorial Board member, reviewer of a scientific journal) that violate accepted norms, scientific ethics principles that has negative consequences for third parties and/or organizations, and also behavior that contradicts to norms and standards of Publishing ethics for scientific journals. Also, behavior is considered to be unethical when one or more publication process participants (author, publisher, editor-in-chief, Editorial Board member, reviewer of a scientific journal) provide reviews of their manuscripts, arrange contractual and/or pseudo-reviews, resort to agency services for publication of the results of scientific research, falsify the composition of the authors’ team, publish pseudo-scientific research, transfer the manuscript material(s) to other journals/publications without the consent of the author(s), transfer the author(s) material to third parties, pirate copyrights, and confidentiality principles, performs activities aimed at manipulating citations.
   7. A violation of the scientific ethics principles is noncompliance with accepted scientific ethics principles.
   8. Conflict of interest is a situation in which the personal and/or other interest of a person (group of persons) may influence a decision and thus be detrimental to the interests of the participant(s) of the publication process, third parties, society and/or organization(s), including the employer of the person (group of persons) in question.
   9. Affiliation of an author means his/her institutional affiliation, place of work of the scientist indicated in scientific papers, applications, questionnaires, and other documents in the competition for scientific prizes, scholarships, grants.
   10. Editor-in-Chief is a member of the Editorial Board who leads the Editorial Board of a journal and makes the final decision regarding the publication of a manuscript based on the results of peer review and scientific editing
   11. The Journal’s Editorial Board carries out scientific management of the journal, determines and controls the journal’s editorial policy, and manages the process of papers’ approval and publication.
   12. Editorial Board is a generalized name used to refer to the editor-in-chief, executive secretary, and other Editorial Board members.
   13. Publication process includes accepting, reviewing, scientifically editing, preparing a manuscript for publication, and publishing scientific articles in the next or subsequent journal issues.
   14. Author(s) is a person or (group of persons, authors’ team) who have made a greater contribution to the conception, scientific design, execution, and interpretation of research work and have participated in creating a research paper.
   15. Original text is an original authentic text that has not been borrowed and translated from another language but was created as a result of independent creative research work.
   16. Manuscript is a previously unpublished author’s scholarly work submitted to a journal Editorial Board for publication.
   17. Scientific article is the final or intermediate results of theoretical, experimental, or analytical activity of scientific research that contains previously unpublished and having novelty of development of conclusions and recommendations of the author. It is also a review article of previously published scientific research. The structure of the scientific article, as a rule, consists of the title, abstract, keywords, main provisions, introduction, materials and methods, results, discussion, conclusion, information about funding (if any), and a list of references.
   18. Falsification (from Latin falsify) is a deliberate distortion, forgery, substitution (genuine, real) by false.
   19. Misrepresentation is the alteration of information to obtain the necessary results in scientific research.
   20. Fabrication is the presentation and use in scientific papers and/or other works of data that are not proven or do not correspond to reality.
   21. False authorship is fake, anonymization, pseudo-anonymization, hoaxing, playing the author.
   22. False co-authorship means mentioning persons who have not contributed to scientific paper (making an article, report, monograph, etc., application for an award, scholarship, grant, etc.) as authors of the article.
   23. Duplication of a publication is a publication made based on published researches of the author with making minor changes, rework of the title, abstract, partially the text of the article, etc. or translated text of the article in another language, as well as concealment of information about previously performed researches in their duplication; republishing without notifying the publisher, journal Editorial Board and/or unjustified self-rendering of a scientific paper.
   24. Misappropriation is an intentional deception committed by a scientist or a group of scientists to obtain an undeserved or illegal benefit.
   25. Plagiarism is using someone else’s borrowed text, ideas, work as one’s own without citing original authorship (without reference to sources), or using borrowed materials with references in a form and volume that casts doubt on the independence of the completed work. Falsification of references is also considered to be a form of plagiarism.
   Plagiarism is a violation of the current legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan and entails legal liability.
   26. Self-plagiarism is the republishing by the author of his previously published article, in part or in full, without specifying this fact.
   27. Peer-reviewing is the procedure of reviewing scientific papers (articles, monographs, applications for a grant, project, etc.) by scientists acting in the same field of science to ensure the quality of the scientific paper, the correctness and reliability of the presented results.
   28. A reviewer is a scientist specializing in a particular field of scientific knowledge and authorized to expertise scientific papers.
   29. Expertise of scientific papers is assessing a scientific paper based on the opinion of experts (reviewers) to make further decisions and selection.
   30. Retraction of an article is a way to alert readers of publications that contain serious errors or incorrect data and informing them not to rely on the conclusions in such publications. Inaccurate data can result from honest mistakes or improper research behavior.
   31. Erratum (typo) is an error in a printed text, usually due to accidents. A typo mainly results in a wrong order of letters, one letter disappearing from the word, an extra letter being added, or a letter replacement by another letter.
   32. Corrigendum (correction) means the correction of typos, spelling, grammatical, stylistic, punctuation errors in the text of a scientific paper.