The publication of peer-reviewed articles in accordance with the following rules: “Publication Ethics and Malpractice Regulation” is an important model for the journal “Labour protection problems in Ukraine”. It is necessary to agree on the standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in publishing: the author(s), journal editor, reviewer and publisher. Our ethical statements are based on the COPE Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Editorial Board Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.

The Editor-in-Chief may be guided by the policies of the editorial staff of the journal and be limited to such legal requirements, which then come into force with regard to libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief usually consults with other editors or reviewers when making this decision.

Objectivity

The Editor-in-Chief and each editorial board member the at any time evaluates the manuscripts for their intellectual content, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The Editor-in-Chief and each editorial board member should not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial consultants and the publisher, as the case may be.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in the submitted manuscript should not be used in the research of the Editor-in-Chief, any of the editorial board member, reviewers, etc. without the written consent of the author.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review helps the editor in making editorial decisions, and through editorial links with the author can also help the author to improve the work.

Urgency

Any reviewer who assumes that he does not have the right to review the submitted manuscript or knows that its quick review is not possible should notify the editor and free himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review should be treated as confidential documents. These documents may not be shown or discussed with anyone other than with the permission of the editor.

Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author(s) is inappropriate. Reviewers must articulate their views with supporting evidence.

Sources Confirmation

Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors. Any statement that has previously been reported about an observation, conclusion or argument must be accompanied by a reference. The reviewer should also draw the attention of the editor to any significant similarity or coincidence between the manuscript in question and any other published article that he knows personally.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

The privileged information or ideas obtained during the review must be kept confidential and not used for personal purposes. Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they encounter a conflict of interest as a result of competitive, collaborative or other relationships or relationships with any of the authors, companies or institutions.

Authors Responsibilities

Authors of the original study should provide an accurate report of this study, as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Baseline data should also be accurately presented. The article should contain enough details and links to allow others to repeat the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Originality and plagiarism

Authors must ensure that they have written a completely original work. In cases where parts of the content intersect with published or submitted content, authors should acknowledge and quote these sources. In addition, provide the editor (upon request) with a copy of any submitted manuscript that may contain duplicate or closely related content.

Multiple, redundant or present publication

The author should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same study in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to several journals simultaneously is unethical behaviour, and publication of this manuscript is unacceptable. Therefore, the authors must confirm that the manuscript, in the form in which it was presented, is not considered and not accepted for publication elsewhere.

Sources Confirmation

Proper recognition of the work of other authors should always be given. Authors should refer to publications that influenced the determination of the nature of the study of the submitted manuscript.

Manuscript authorship

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, execution or interpretation of the research presented, and all of them should be indicated as co-authors. If there are others involved in certain significant aspects of the research project, they should be recognized or listed as participants.

The correspondent author should ensure that all co-authors who have made significant contributions to the study are included in the manuscript, review and approve the final version of the manuscript, and agree with its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other significant conflict of interest that may be construed as affecting the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Main mistakes of published works

When the author finds a significant error or inaccuracy in his published work, he is obliged to immediately notify the editor of the journal and to collaborate with the editor to recall or correct the article.