Publication Ethics

Russian Journal of Money and Finance’s editors are committed to ethical principles at every stage of the publication process. We comply with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and strive to follow all of its recommendations. We expect the same commitment to the ethical code of conduct from all parties involved in publication, including authors, editors and reviewers.

General responsibilities of editors

In evaluating a research paper, editors shall be guided exclusively by its scientific merits and scholarly importance.

The founder of the Journal has no right to interfere in the decision-making process of publication. In this way, the decision-making process is separated from short-term, political or any other considerations.

The editors shall not use any unpublished information in their own research without written approval of the author. The editorial team protects the confidentiality of personal information received from contributors and advises its reviewers to likewise strictly observe this rule.

The editors shall not cancel a decision to publish a paper unless the pending publication of such a paper leads to infringements of legislation or ethical principles.

Any evidence suggesting potential misconduct or any complaints and accusations of misconduct shall result in action by the editorial team based on COPE recommendations. This rule extends to both published papers and pending publications.

The editors are authorised to reject a paper independently without peer review, should it be found that it fails to meet the Journal’s remit or quality standards. This decision must be made impartially and based exclusively on the content of the paper, with the reasons for this decision to be clearly communicated to the author.

The editors shall distinguish between critical remarks related to misconduct and critical remarks regarding limitations and shortcomings of research work. We encourage scientific discussions as the best way to improve the quality of research.

Research papers for publication are welcome from the editors, co-editors, Bank of Russia officers and members of the Advisory Board. Their papers shall be put under no less impartial review than those of any other authors.

Ethical principles for authors

Authors must provide an objective justification of the scientific importance of their research paper. Review papers may be published provided that they contain original conclusions and/or recommendations.

Authors guarantee that any research paper they submit to the editorial team is original and that all references to other works are properly identified. Plagiarism is unacceptable in any form: literal reproduction without citation of sources, rephrasing without citation of sources and self-plagiarism (authors are obliged to refer to any previously published parts of their research papers). Knowingly false or unreliable data are inadmissible.

Authors further guarantee that the papers they present to the editorial team are not under review for publication in other journals. Multiple submissions of a single paper to a number of journals simultaneously are viewed as improper conduct and unacceptable.

The lead author must secure the consent of all co-authors (if any) with respect to the finalised version of the paper to be published in the Journal, and to the publication of the paper in the Journal.

Sources of funding for the research (if any) shall be explicitly stated and their role in the conduct of research shall be indicated.

Ethical principles for reviewers

Reviewers must consent to review only papers that they possess the necessary expertise to evaluate and which they can review in due time.

The reviewer must withdraw from review if he/she was involved in any efforts related to the preparation of a paper or in any research activities described in the paper.

The reviewer must respect the confidential nature of any review and never disclose any details of the paper during or after review to anyone except those authorised by the editorial team (e.g. the editor).

The reviewer has no right to use information received in the course of a review process for his/her own benefit, or for the benefit or discredit of any other persons or organisations.

The reviewer must inform the editor of a potential conflict of interest related to the review of a paper, or seek advice from the editor if in doubt as to whether the current situation constitutes a conflict of interest.

Evaluations must be made objectively; conclusions must be precise and explained in a way that enables authors to use them for further improvement of their research papers.