of National academy
of sciences of the
Republic of Kazakhstan
The Editorial Office of the News of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Series of Geology and Technical Sciences is guided in its activities by the principles of publication ethics and ensures compliance with standards of integrity, transparency, and objectivity in the consideration and publication of scientific materials.
The core publication ethics provisions of the journals of the Central Asian Academic Research Center were developed on the basis of international standards proposed by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).
1. Decision-Making Criteria. When making publication decisions, the Editor is guided by the scientific significance of the work, the reliability of the data presented, and the manuscript’s compliance with the journal’s scope and requirements.
2. Non-Discrimination. The Editor evaluates the intellectual content of manuscripts irrespective of the author’s personal characteristics (race, gender, religion, citizenship, social status, political views, or other factors not related to the scholarly content of the work).
3. Prevention of Plagiarism. The Editor does not allow for publication materials for which there are sufficient grounds to suspect plagiarism or other unethical forms of borrowing.
4. Handling Enquiries and Disputes. The Editorial Office considers enquiries, claims, and complaints related to manuscripts and published materials and, where a conflict situation is identified, takes the necessary measures to restore violated rights and ensure due process.
5. Editorial Rejection Without Peer Review. The Editor may reject a manuscript without sending it for peer review if it does not match the journal’s scope or fails to meet basic quality requirements. Such decisions are made impartially, solely on the basis of the manuscript’s content, and the reasons for rejection are communicated to the author in an appropriate manner.
6. Conflicts of Interest and Submissions by Editorial Members. The Editor, members of the Editorial Board, and other persons affiliated with the journal may submit their own research for publication; however, such manuscripts must be evaluated on the same basis as others, with strict observance of objectivity and measures to prevent conflicts of interest.
A reviewer conducts a scientific evaluation of the authors’ materials; therefore, their actions must be objective, impartial, and professional.
1. Competence and adherence to deadlines. The reviewer agrees to review only those manuscripts whose evaluation falls within their scientific expertise and only if they are able to prepare the review in a timely manner.
2. Confidentiality. The reviewer maintains the confidentiality of the manuscript and the content of the review and does not disclose details of the article or the expert opinion to third parties, except for persons authorized by the editorial office.
3. Prohibition of manuscript transfer. A manuscript received for review is considered a confidential document and may not be shared for reading or discussion with third parties without the permission of the editorial office.
4. Objectivity and professionalism. The reviewer is obliged to provide an objective and well-reasoned assessment of the research results. Personal criticism of the author, as well as discrediting or derogatory language, is unacceptable.
5. Prohibition of using unpublished data. Unpublished information obtained from the manuscript must not be used by the reviewer for personal purposes or in the interests of third parties.
6. Reasoned conclusions. Conclusions must be clearly formulated and substantiated so that the author can use them to improve the work.