Review
Ethical standards
Editorial of the journal "Amparo" maintains a certain level of requirements in the selection and acceptance of articles submitted to the editorial staff. These norms are determined by the scientific direction of the journal and the standards of quality of scientific works and their presentation, accepted in the scientific community.
The editorial calls for adherence to the principles of the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications developed by the Committee on Ethics of Scientific Publications (COPE).
Ethical Obligations of Journal Editors
The editor should review all manuscripts submitted for publication without prejudice, evaluating each manuscript properly, regardless of race, religion, nationality, or the position or place of work of the author (s).
Information is not allowed to be published if there is sufficient reason to believe that it is plagiarism.
All materials submitted for publication are carefully selected and reviewed. The Editorial Board reserves the right to reject the article or to return it for further revision. The author is obliged to revise the article according to the comments of the reviewers or editorial board.
The decision of the editor to accept the article for publication is based on such characteristics of the article as the importance of results, originality, quality of presentation of the material and the correspondence of the journal's profile. Manuscripts may be rejected without review if the editor believes that they do not fit the journal's profile. In making such decisions, the editor may consult with members of the editorial board or reviewers.
Ethical obligations of authors
Authors should ensure that they have written completely original articles, and that if the authors have used the work or words of others, then it has been properly framed in quotation marks or quotes.
Submitting an identical article in more than one journal is considered unethical and unacceptable.
The article should be structured, contain enough links and be designed as required.
Unfair or deliberately inaccurate statements in the article constitute unethical conduct and are inadmissible.
The author who corresponds with the editorial board must ensure that all co-authors have read and approved the final version of the article and have agreed to its publication.
The authors of the articles bear full responsibility for the content of the articles and for the fact of their publication. The editorial board does not bear any responsibility to the authors for the possible damage caused by the publication of the article. The editorial board has the right to remove an article if it is found out that in the course of publishing the article, one's rights or generally accepted norms of scientific ethics have been violated. The editorial board informs the author of the fact of removal of the article.
Ethical obligations of reviewers
The editorial staff adheres to double-blind peer review to ensure that the manuscripts are evaluated objectively
Since the review of manuscripts is an essential step in the process of publication and, therefore, in the implementation of the scientific method as such, each scientist is obliged to do some work on the review.
If the selected reviewer is not sure that his or her qualification is in line with the level of research presented in the manuscript, he must immediately return the manuscript.
The reviewer must objectively evaluate the quality of the manuscript, the experimental and theoretical work presented, its interpretation and presentation, and the extent to which the work meets high scientific and literary standards. The reviewer must respect the intellectual independence of the authors.
Reviewers should adequately explain and reason their opinions so that editors and authors can understand why their comments are based. Any statement that an observation, conclusion, or argument has already been published must be accompanied by a reference.
The reviewer should draw the editor's attention to any significant similarity between this manuscript and any published article or any manuscript submitted to another journal at the same time.
Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations contained in this manuscript unless the author agrees.
A prerequisite for the publication of articles in the journal "Amparo" is a peer review conducted to comply with the principles of academic integrity and ethics.
All articles submitted to the editorial board except for reviews are passed through the peer review process.
Members of the editorial board are involved in the review, who determine the relevance of the topic and have publications in relevant subject areas.
The manuscript of the article is sent by e-mail to the editor: Ця електронна адреса захищена від спам-ботів. вам потрібно увімкнути JavaScript, щоб побачити її. .
The editorial board uses double-blind review (double-blind - neither the author nor the reviewer know each other).
Reviewers highlight the following issues:
• whether the content of the article corresponds to the topic stated in the title;
• Does the content of the article correspond to the journal's thematic areas;
• Does the content of the article have any novelty;
• Does the article correspond to the scientific level of the journal;
• whether it is appropriate to publish the article, taking into account previously published literature, and whether it is of interest to a wide range of readers;
• What are the positives, as well as the shortcomings of the article, which corrections and additions should be made by the author (if any).
The author of the article is responsible for copyright infringement and non-compliance with existing standards in the article materials.
