Ministry of Education and Science


Az Buki National Publishing House for Education and Science


"Az Buki" National Publishing House

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Az-buki National Publishing House (Az-buki) Ethics and Publication Malpracice Statement is based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and is commited to following the best practices on ethical matters and standards of ethical behaviour at all stages of the publication process.


Duties of the Publisher
The publisher takes the responsibility to promote these guidelines to all persons, involved in creating and producing all the scientific journals and other publications, issued by Az-buki. The guidelines are to be endorsed by editors, reviewers and authors as part of our common efforts to provide objective and valuable information to all who are interested in reading and gathering knowledge from it.
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. If necessary, this includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or - in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work.
The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining own digital archive.
The publisher, together with 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 take place.


Duties of the Editors
The editors of Az-buki accept and evaluate manuscripts on the basis of their academic value (originality, clarity, actuality, relevance) with no regard to gender, race, ethnic origin, political or religious philosophy, social or institutional affiliation. All decisions for editing or publishing texts are taken by the journal team without other party influence. The Editor-in-Chief has the authority over the journal content and timing of publication.
The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers - experts in the respective field. The decision for publication is based on the manuscript importance and value, reviewers’ comments and recommendations and conformity with the journal requirements and guidelines.
The editors should always consider the interests of the authors and the readers when working on publication improvement or making corrections when needed.
Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the people, directly involved in the evaluation and publication process - corresponding author, reviewers or the publisher.
Editors and editorial board members will not use or provide to third parties unpublished information of a manuscript without the authors’ written consent. Information, obtained as a result of handling the manuscript is seen as confidential and will not be used in someone’s personal favor. Editors declare that will not participate in process of considering manuscripts that may result in conflicts of interest – including but not only on competitive, collaborative base, or other relationships/connections with author or connected institution. In such case the affected editor will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.
Editors will react on eventual misconduct with no matter a paper is published or unpublished, and will take the necessary responsive measures if necessary - correction, retraction, expression of concern or other note as may be relevant.


Duties of Reviewers
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 (on exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
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.
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 should immediately declare their conflicts of interest to the editors so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Peer review (double-blind) is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and a milestone of scientific endeavor. Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts.
Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors and notify the editors – also of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript of which they have personal knowledge.
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.


Duties of Authors
All submitted manuscripts should be original research works that have not been published or submitted for review in other journals. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and unacceptable.
Only persons who made significant contributions to the conception, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study, drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content, or are involved in submitting the final version of the paper and its submission for publication, should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content.
Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and they have appropriately cited all used work and/or words of other authors. Plagiarism in all its forms is seen as unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should also disclose any conflicts of interest (including financial) that might influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript.
Authors 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. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and respond promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and copyright permissions. Authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal when asked to.
If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct or retract the paper. If a third party reports that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable.
Authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals after publication – with respect to the proprietary legal rights and data authorship.



where en

Erih bg