The Editorial Board of the Journal is guided in its work by the code “Responsibilities for Research Publication: International Standards for Authors” and the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Principles of publication ethics in the activities of the publisher:
Publication Ethics creates conditions for adherence to ethical principles among the Editorial Board, editors, reviewers, and authors.
Publication Ethics Standards for the journal help prevent violations and provide support in cases of claims or complaints directed at the Journal's editorial team.
In accordance with the journal’s editorial policy, except for open access regulations, the editorial team ensures the confidentiality of all information related to the publication process.
Based on the principles of objectivity and transparency, the editorial team offers the possibility of freely selecting works for publication, guided by the results of the peer review process for scientific articles.
Principles of publication ethics in the activities of the Editorial Board:
The Editorial Board of the Journal makes the final decision on the publication of an article based on compliance with formatting requirements and the results of the review.
In making the publication decision, the Editorial Board is guided by the editorial policy of the journal. In cases of violations of scientific and publication ethics or copyright, the publication of an article containing plagiarism is prohibited.
The editorial team is responsible for deciding whether to publish or reject articles submitted by the author(s).
If the data are unreliable or obtained as a result of violations of scientific and publication ethics, experimental errors, previously published without notifying the editorial team, contain plagiarism, or information about unethical research, the editorial team must initiate the retraction process for the article.
The Editorial Board must not disclose an article submitted for review to anyone other than the author, reviewers, and publisher. Any article submitted for editorial consideration is considered a confidential document and should not be discussed or shown to third parties.
The editorial team guarantees that it will not use articles rejected for publication without the written consent of the author(s).
The editorial team must require all participants in the publication process to be open regarding conflicts of interest (if any).
If members of the Editorial Board have conflicts of interest with the authors of the article, they are obliged to inform the scientific editor, who will then pass the review to another member of the editorial team without a conflict of interest.
The Editorial Board has the right to develop and improve the scientific journal, uphold principles of freedom of opinion, and meet the professional scientific needs of the authors and readers of the journal.
The Editorial Board must not allow decisions to reject the publication of an article based on commercial or other interests of the authors, reviewers, or publisher.
The Editorial Board is responsible for publishing articles that contain indications of violations of standards, norms, and principles of publication ethics, unethical behavior, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, excessive self-citation, or conflicts of interest.
If the editorial team or any member of the Editorial Board discovers facts of violations of scientific or publication ethics, the editor-in-chief must initiate the retraction procedure based on the decision of the Editorial Board.
In the event that the editorial office receives a manuscript submitted by the author(s) or previously published in the journal “Madeni mura”, along with complaints from one or more individuals, signed with their full name and providing contact information (mobile phone number, postal address, and email address), regarding violations of scientific nature or standards, norms, and principles of publication ethics (in paper or electronic format), the Editorial Board of the journal must review the complaints and provide a response, signed by the editor-in-chief or their deputy, within no more than 30 calendar days from the date of receipt of the complaint in the editorial office. In the case of receiving a complaint from an individual applicant (or a group of individuals) citing ethical violations, signed with a full name and contact details (mobile phone number, postal address, and email address), the Editorial Board must consider the complaint and respond within a period of no more than 30 calendar days from the date of receipt.
Anonymous complaints will not be considered.
The editorial team is obligated to take reasonable measures regarding complaints received from individuals (or groups) pointing out violations of scientific and publication ethics.
If the evidence provided in the complaint is confirmed, the editorial team has the right to refuse publication of the article and terminate further collaboration with the author(s) regarding this article, or to carry out the retraction procedure for an article previously published in the journal.
Ethical principles for authors of scientific publications:
The author(s), by submitting their article to the journal's editorial board, guarantee that it has not been previously published and is not submitted to other publications.
Submitting an article simultaneously to multiple journals is considered a violation of publication ethics standards.
The author(s) guarantee that the research results presented in the article are an independent and original work.
If the research is conducted by multiple authors, the primary author should be listed first among the authors.
Individuals who have made significant contributions to the research should be included in the list of co-authors.
The primary author must ensure that information about all co-authors is included in the article.
All authors of the article are responsible for the content of the manuscript.
The author(s) are responsible for submitting the article if it shows signs of violating scientific quality or the standards, norms, and principles of publication ethics, including unethical behavior, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, excessive self-citation, fabrication, distortion of data, authorship fraud, copying, conflicts of interest, and deception.
If the article uses excerpts from the works of other authors or borrows their ideas, bibliographic references to the original sources must be provided.
Any form of plagiarism (improperly formatted quotes, alteration of words, or appropriation of research results, text, or ideas from others) is considered unethical and a serious violation.
In the event of discovering errors or inaccuracies at any stage of the publication process, the author(s) must immediately notify the editorial board and correct the errors, as well as publish an Erratum (notification of errors/typos) or Corrigendum (corrections) with appropriate explanations if serious errors are found that cannot be corrected.
If the reviewer, editor-in-chief, or any member of the editorial board has doubts about the validity of the research results, the author(s) must provide additional materials to confirm the ideas, results, or references presented in the article.
The author(s) must respect ethical norms regarding mutual relationships concerning criticism, remarks, and the publication of the article.
Non-compliance by the author(s) with the ethical principles outlined in this section of the standards is considered a serious violation of publication ethics and may serve as grounds for retracting the article from the review or publication process.
Publication ethics for reviewers:
The reviewer is obligated to conduct an objective review of the article. Personal critical remarks directed at the author(s) are not permitted.
The reviewer must justify their decision to accept or reject the article by providing relevant arguments.
The reviewer should avoid allowing the origin of the article, personal relationships with the authors, or commercial interests to influence the content of their review.
The reviewer should keep in mind that their evaluation of the article serves as the basis for the final editorial decisions regarding publication or rejection, and can also assist the author in improving the article.
The article sent to the reviewer for evaluation is considered a confidential document.
The reviewer is not allowed to show or discuss the article with others without the permission of the editor-in-chief.
The reviewer must not disseminate unpublished articles.
The reviewer must not use information or scientific ideas obtained during the review process for personal purposes.
The reviewer should provide necessary comments and textual corrections that contribute to the improvement of the article's quality.
The reviewer is obligated to draw the editorial board's attention to significant similarities between the reviewed article and previously published works.
If the reviewer has sufficient grounds to believe that the manuscript contains facts of violations of scientific or publication ethics, plagiarism, improper borrowing, fabricated materials, or research results, they must not allow the publication of the article.
The reviewer is required to complete the review within the timeframe established by the editorial board. If they are unable to prepare the review within the specified time, they must notify the editorial board.
The reviewer must not evaluate articles that may lead to a conflict of interest due to competition, collaboration, or other relationships with any authors or institutions related to the article.
If the reviewer believes their qualifications are insufficient to evaluate the article, they must immediately notify the editor-in-chief and decline to review the article.
Adherence to norms and standards of publication ethics principles:
If the article violates the ethical norms of publication ethics, the situation must be carefully reviewed, and legal norms regulating collective scientific work conditions and ethical standards should be applied.
When considering issues of unethical behavior by participants in the publication process, the principle of confidentiality must be maintained.
The resolution of ethical conflicts should be carried out through discussion and debate.
Requirements for publication ethics:
Justification and Reliability.
The research must be conducted in accordance with ethical standards and applicable laws.
Researchers must adhere to ethical standards and relevant legislation during the study.
Authors should take collective responsibility for their work and the content of the publication.
Authors should carefully check the textual data and the substantiation of the claims.
Integrity.
Images (microphotographs, photographs, etc.) must be provided without adjustments or alterations.
Researchers should aim for clear and unambiguous descriptions of methods and results.
Research sponsors cannot prevent the publication of negative results concerning their products or positions (exceptions apply for government-classified research related to security).
If authors discover an error in a submitted, accepted, or published work, they must immediately notify the editor. Authors should cooperate with the editors in correcting or retracting published data.
The data provided by the author must accurately reflect the citations and notes.
Authors should not copy references to other publications without having read the relevant work.
New results must be presented in relation to data from previous studies. The work of other authors should be represented fairly, and scientific reviews and syntheses of existing research should include all conclusions, regardless of whether they support or refute the hypothesis..
The limitations of the research should be reflected in the publications.
Originality.
Authors bear personal responsibility for the originality of their work and for ensuring that it has not been published in other journals or in other languages. If the editors have not agreed to a joint publication, the work should not be submitted simultaneously to multiple journals. If articles are published jointly, this fact must be clear to readers.
Current laws and conventions regarding copyright must be observed. Copied materials (tables, images, extensive quotes) must be reproduced with proper attribution to the original source.
Works and publications of other researchers must be appropriately cited and referenced. All sources used must be included in the list of references.
Data, texts, images, or ideas provided by other researchers should not be presented as the authors' own. Original interpretations of data taken from other researchers' publications must be placed in quotation marks.
Multiple publications arising from a single scientific project must be clearly identified, and the original publication must be mentioned. Translations and information adapted for different audiences must be clearly identified, citing the original in accordance with current copyright conventions and other requirements and permissions. Authors must obtain permission from the original publisher before re-publishing any previously published works.
Reviewing and Publications:
Authors must comply with the publishers' requirements that a publication cannot be simultaneously submitted for review to different journals.
Authors must notify the editorial office in the event of withdrawing their article from consideration.
Authors must respond professionally and in a timely manner to the reviewers' comments.
Authors must respect the publishers' requirements that prohibit disclosing research results prior to their publication in the journal.
Official complaints from authors and the procedure for their consideration:
Complaints regarding unethical behavior, signed by the author(s) with their full name, contact information (mobile phone number, postal address, and email), must be submitted to the Ethics Commission of the National Museum of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
Anonymous complaints submitted to the Ethics Commission will not be considered.
The complainant(s) have the right to withdraw the complaint at any stage of the Ethics Commission's review.
If a complaint about violations of publication ethics principles and standards is submitted to the Ethics Commission regarding participants in the publication, these participants have the right to present evidence refuting the complaint. The evidence must be signed by the complainant and submitted (in paper and/or electronic format) for review by the Ethics Commission. Additionally, the complaint may be forwarded (in paper and/or electronic format) for the decision of the Ethics Commission.
Measures taken in case of violations of publication ethics:
In the event that a complaint is submitted to the Ethics Commission regarding violations of the principles and standards of publication ethics, or unethical behavior, it must be promptly reviewed in accordance with established procedures. Necessary measures must be taken impartially, and the results should be formalized in the form of a protocol decision by the Ethics Commission.
Based on the protocol of the Ethics Commission or in individual cases requiring further investigation of violations of publication ethics principles and standards, as well as unethical behavior, the commission has the right to issue an order appointing a committee to determine the presence or absence of unethical behavior. The committee will consist of Editorial Board members (excluding those subject to the complaint) and experts in the relevant scientific field.