1.1. This Regulation establishes the standards of ethical behavior for the parts involved in the publication process: authors, Editorial Board, reviewers, publisher, including rules of decency, privacy, control of publications, taking into consideration possible conflicts of interests.
1.2. The Editorial Board of the journal "Bulletin of Ugric Studies" is guided by the provisions of Chapter 70 "Copyright" of the Russian Civil Code, ethical standards and principles adopted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (rasep.ru).
1.3. The Editorial Board monitors compliance of the articles to the requirements of the Russian legislation in the sphere of mass media, inform the authors in case of impossibility of publication or about necessary correction in the method of material presentation (e.g., at the mention of terrorist and extremist organizations, citation of prohibited materials, the dissemination of information about suicide, incitement to separatism, etc.).
1.4. All materials published in the journal undergo a mandatory blind peer reviewing by experts.
1.5. The journal is an online edition registered under the legislation of the Russian Federation guarantees free access to publications for authors and readers, as well as provides the storage of materials on own website and in repositories of scientific information.
  

2.1. The standard of the decision on article publication
The Chief Editor is responsible for deciding on the admission of materials for publication or refusal to publication within the time specified on the journal's website and in the Regulations of the procedure for reviewing. The Chief Editor makes decision on the base of the results of check for compliance with requirements to registration of results of the review. Articles are admitted solely on the basis of their scientific value. Making decision about publication of the manuscript members of the Board are also guided by the policy of the journal and do not allow the publication of articles with signs of libel, slander, plagiarism or copyright infringement.
2.2. The standard of equality of all authors
The Editorial Board is guided by the principles of scientific character, objectivity, professionalism, impartiality. It only evaluates the intellectual content of manuscripts, regardless of nationality, ethnic origin, citizenship, sex, occupation, place of work, position, academic titles, academic degrees, place of residence, as well as political, philosophical, religious and other beliefs of the author.
2.3. The standard of confidentiality
The Chief Editor should not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than to the author, members of the Editorial Board, reviewers, and publisher. The Chief Editor does not disclose features of collaborative work on articles or the reasons of their refusal, except for copies of the reviews at the requests of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. The Editor should make every effort to ensure the anonymity of peer reviewing.
2.4. The standard of disclosure of conflict of interests
The Editorial Board guarantees that the materials of the manuscripts rejected for publication will not be used in own works of the members of the Editorial Board without the written consent of the author. Chief Editor should demand from all authors to provide information about the presence of conflict of interests and publish corrections if they are detected after publication. If it is necessary Chief Editor may carries out other actions, such as publication of a refutation or expressions of concern. The Editorial Board encourages authors to disclose relationships with industry organizations, and funds which can lead to a conflict of interests. All sources of financial support of research should be noted by the authors in the body of the article.
2.5. The standard of citation of the edition in which the article is published
 The Editorial Board has no right to force authors to cite certain works as the necessary conditions for acceptance of a manuscript for publication. Any recommendations on citing of works should be based on their scientific importance and pursue the goal of improving of the presented material. The members of the Editorial Board can recommend to the authors sources in the frameworks of the process of reviewing, but such recommendations are not binding. The Editorial Board prevents using the publication in the journal as an opportunity to carry out an unreasonably large number of links to other publications not related to the theme of the article.
2.6. The standard of communication with the authors
The interaction of the Editorial Board with authors is based on the principles of benevolence, equity, courtesy, objectivity, honesty and transparency. The Editorial Board may offer the author the publication in another journal which is more in line with the profile. Transfer of materials is carried out after approval with the author.
2.7. The standard of terms of payment for the publication
The journal "Bulletin of Ugric Studies" publishes all materials free of charge. In the case of a taking decision about charging fees, this information is posted on the website of the founder and on the journal's website. Payment is made to the official Bank account of the organization-founder or by electronic means, integrated with the settlement account of the organization. Other forms of payment are not allowed.
 

3.1. The standard of originality (inadmissibility of plagiarism)
Providing the manuscript for the journal "Bulletin of Ugric Studies", the author (or authors) must guarantees its originality and novelty. If the author (authors) in the article used the works or the fragments of the works (citations) of other persons, then such borrowing must have references to the original source in the bibliography attached to the article. All submitted articles are checked through the system Antiplagiat. For decision making about the admission of the article for the reviewing, it must contain at least 60% of the originality. Carried out by the author self-check for plagiarism, the reviews can only serve as a tool to prepare articles before it can be submitted to the editor.
Plagiarism and autoplagiarism are unethical and unacceptable for the author. The Editorial Board ceases collaboration with the authors permitting the plagiarism.
3.2. The standard of single-time publication of the article
The author presents to the Editorial Board the manuscript of the article which was never been unpublished before and is not under the editorial offices of other journals. Simultaneous submission of the manuscript, including its translation into a foreign language, in several journals is unethical and unacceptable.
3.3. The standard of reliability of results of scientific research
Authors should provide accurate, correct and objective results of their research. Knowingly incorrect and falsified statements are unacceptable. The Editorial Board ceases collaboration with the authors allowing falsification or fabrication of data.
3.4. The standard of acknowledgement of sources
The author must correctly note in the bibliography the scientific and other sources which were used in the research and had a significant impact on the results of the study.
3.5. The standard of the authorship of the article
The author is the only person who substantially participated in the writing of the work, in the development of its concepts, in research design, collecting of material, analysis, and interpretation; the consent of all authors to the publication is mandatory. All co-authors must meet these criteria. If some person has participated in a substantial part of the project, he should be commended, or this person should be listed as a person who has made a significant contribution to this research. The author must guarantee that the final version of the article and its submission for publication has been approved by all co-authors. The publication of the uncoordinated text with the author, as well as the incorporation of extraneous persons in the list of co-authors, is a violation of copyright.
3.6. The standard of error correction in published works
If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his published work, he is obliged to promptly notify the editor of the journal and cooperate with the Editorial Board to publish a refutation or correction of the article. If the Editorial Board learns about the error from a third party, the author is obliged immediately to remove it or to prove the absence of such error.
 

4.1. The standard of contribution of the reviewer into editorial decisions
Expert opinion of the reviewer for the manuscript promotes the adoption of editorial decisions and helps the author to improve the manuscript. The decision to accept the manuscript for publication, return it to the author for revision or rejection of the publication is adopted by the Editorial Board on the basis of the results of the reviewing.
4.2. The standard of qualification of the reviewer
The reviewer must have sufficient qualification for evaluating of the manuscript according to the corresponding directions of the journal. The reviewer believing that he or she is not competent in consideration of the issues of the article must refuse to review.
4.3. The standard of timing of reviewing
The reviewer must provide the review within the time specified by the Editorial Board. It is assumed that the reviewers accepting the manuscript for consideration will be able to provide the results of their work no later than in three weeks. If the study of the manuscript and preparing of the review in a timely manner is not possible, the reviewer should notify the Chief Editor about the impossibility of reviewing the manuscript.
4.4. The standard of confidentiality of the reviewer
Confidential information or ideas obtained by reviewers from the accepted manuscripts for consideration are not subject to disclosure and use for personal purposes. Any manuscript received for reviewing must be treated as a confidential document.
4.5. The standard of objectivity of the review
The reviews should be objective. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewers are required to clearly express their opinion and support it with relevant rigorous arguments and provide by references to authoritative sources.
4.6. The standard of acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published works relevant to the theme and unincorporated in the bibliography of the manuscript and to indicate the fragments of the manuscript in which there are no references to origin sources and to inform the Editor about it. They must also inform the Editor about any doubts arising in respect of ethical acceptability of the research contained in the manuscript.
4.7. The standard of disclosure of conflict of interests
The reviewer must not consider manuscripts in case of conflict of interests (for example, due to joint and other interactions and relationships with any of the authors or other organizations related to the presented work).
 

5.1. Editor, the Editorial Board members, authors, reviewers, and publishers all have ethical obligations with regard to the publication and dissemination of results of scientific research. Using copyrighted material the authors must have all necessary permissions (for example, illustrating the article by reproductions and photographs).
5.2. The Editorial Board has an obligation to prevent situations when authors, reviewers, or other subjects involved in the process of creating of scientific texts and preparing them for publication, allow unethical behavior. The Editor provides the withdrawal of unconscientious publications from the scientific space.
 

6.1. The journal "Bulletin of Ugric Studies" on the website https://tavr.science publishes Provisions on the journal, on publication ethics and reviewing, clearly formulates the policy and the mission of the journal, the rules of manuscript preparation and timing of article submission in the Editorial Board, informs about the availability of the materials, indicates ISSN, contact information of the founder of the journal.