Journal of «Psycholinguistics» supports the modern progressive level of the requirements in relation to a selection and publication of the scientific articles. These norms are determined by the standards of quality of the advanced studies, branch type of the journal, and also scientific directions, accepted in a home and world scientific concord.

At development of positions of publishing policy of the journal a release followed recommendations of Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE), recommendations of Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK) for editors (Elsevier), and also by experience of the Ukrainian and foreign professional concords, scientific organizations, releases of editions and others like that.

The basic ethic requirements to the scientific publications are the norm of behavior and professional duties of the members of editorial board of the journal on attitude and toward each other, and to public, and also to providing of right for every author on intellectual property. All publications of person (editors, authors and reviewers) attracted in a process are oriented on principles of ethics in scientific publications. An editorial board and reviewers of the journal without prejudice examine all materials given to the publication, estimating each of them properly, without regard to racial, confessional, national, gender, political allegiance, and also social position or job of author.

The substantial sign of professional scientific concord of the journal is the implementation of positions of the Code, which sets the basic codes of conduct and duties of the members of this concord and provides a maximal benefit for the professional existence and removes (neutralizes) actions which wouldn’t serve to the interests of individuals; it also provide a right for every author on intellectual property and freedom for expression and self-realization.

Adhering to the Code positions, the release of the journal corresponds to the ethic norms and rules, which persons who participate in preparation of publication of the results of scientific researches (editors, authors and reviewers) must follow.

A release considers that ethic norms and rules, realized, approved and accepted by most skilled researchers, render a substantial help to the students, graduate students and young scientists in a capture of the ethic rules of scientific cooperation, in the improvement of research activity, and leading scientists approve the possibility once again to go back to the questions which have a great ethic value for scientific practice.

• Ethic obligations of Editors
• Ethic obligations of Reviewers
• Ethic obligations of Authors
• Ethic actions of author (-ors) at the repeated consideration of the article and answers on the remarks of a reviewer
• If you got a refuse
• Mechanism (Procedure) of Appeal (Appeals) Author Editorial Decisions

___________________________________________________________________________

A Mechanism of Removal of Violations of Ethics of Publications and Unconscientious Practice is in Connection with Publications

(1). Editors (or readers) must accept clever measures, when they suspect or see any violations of ethics of publication. It touches the both published and unpublished articles.

(2). Editors have no authority to give up investigation of the set ethic violations. It them ethic duty. In these cases they, first of all, must get an answer from the accused authors.

(3). Editors make effort for providing of the proper realization of investigation and carry out structural attempts for the decision of this problem.

(4). If an editor (or reviewer) educed unhonesty in materials of the article, he must operate according to norms, set by Committee on ethics of publications, and in accordance with the specific of the educed violations. If:

• suspected fabricated data in a submitted manuscript
• the reviewer suspects that the submitted manuscript does not disclose a conflict of interest (Col)
• Corresponding author requests addition of extra author before publication
• Corresponding author requests removal of author before publication
• Request for addition of extra author after publication
• Request for removal of author after publication
• Suspected guest, ghost or gift authorship
• Advice on how to spot authorship problems

(5). If readers educed unhonesty in publications, they must operate after next algorithms in each of the below presented cases after a separate flow-chart. If:

• suspected plagiarism in the published article
• suspect the presence of the forged data of the published article
• suspect a presence unexposed at the conflict of interests in the published article
• consider that a reviewer appropriated an authorial scientific idea or data
• wish to get advices in relation to the exposure of problems of authorship