Editorial Board of the "Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Literary Studies. Linguistics. Folklore Studies" complies with all the necessary requirements for submitted manuscripts, which are defined by the scientific areas of the Bulletin and formulated in the Certificate of State Registration, as well as quality standards of scientific works adopted by the scientific community.

Developing the editorial policy regulations of the "Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Literary Studies. Linguistics. Folklore Studies" editorial board was guided by the recommendations of the Committees on Ethics of Publications: COPE and PERK, the experience of foreign and Ukrainian professional communities, scientific organizations and editorial boards.

Editorial board of the journal aims to prevent cases of academic dishonesty and violations of publication ethics such as:

• ideological and political prejudices – political propaganda of any form and manifestation; lobbying of interests of a certain political actor; open or hidden sympathy for any political ideology, party or program;
• ghost authorship (contributorship) – hiding the personal input of the contributor(s); an indication of the contributors who did not conduct the scientific research for any reason (senior position, scientific authority, monetary reward, etc.);
• censorship (including self-censorship) – pressurizing the author to hide facts, ideas, conclusions and other information for ideological, political and other reasons. Self-censorship means the author's deliberate hiding of facts, ideas, conclusions and other information for ideological, political and other reasons;
• conflict of interest – incompatibility of goals, beliefs and values that makes an unbiased assessment of research results impossible;
• discriminatory research practices and discriminatory statements – any form of discrimination on racial, sexual, age, ethnic or other grounds in the course of scientific research and presentation of its results;
• fabrication of data – deliberate production of information (quotations, translation, survey data, etc.), which is not obtained through relevant scientific research;
• not providing references to the sources – deliberate disregard for the sources (achievements of other authors, statistical data, etc.) that were used in the research;
• data falsification – vaking changes by adding, omitting or misrepresenting information to justify or hide errors in scientific research;
• intentional use of logical errors for the manipulation purposes – a conscious violation of the rules of logic to deceive readers;
• excite hostility by using hate speech – the use of hate speech (statements) that provoke hostility and conflict;
• simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to several journals – submission of the same manuscript to the editorial boards of two or more journals at the same time;
• providing false information about qualifications and experience by authors and individuals involved in the publication process – the intentional provision (hiding) of false information by the author(s) regarding the degree, academic rank, position, biography, workplace, work or research experience, profiles on social networks, such as ORCID, Scopus Author ID, ResearcherID, etc;
• academic plagiarism in any form (including self-plagiarism, "translated" plagiarism) – the use of other authors' ideas, statements, achievements, results with no references to the source. "Translated" plagiarism means misrepresentation of words, grammatical constructions, methods, results of paper written in a foreign language in order to conceal the authorship of the original text. "Translated" plagiarism is based on the manipulation of grammatical, lexical and cultural differences between two different languages;
• pseudonyms – the use of a false first name, surname or other data to make identification of the author impossible. 

Ethical Responsibilities of the Editorial Board of the "Bulletin"

1. The Editorial Board is responsible for the materials published in the "Bulletin" (articles, reviews, chronicles, etc.), which are carefully selected and are being reviewed (double "blind" peer review). The Editorial Board reserves the right to reject the article or return it for revision. The author is obliged to revise the article, taking into account the comments of reviewers and / or the editorial board.
2. The editorial board must consider all the manuscripts sent to the editorial board without prejudice, evaluate them qualitatively, regardless of race, religion, nationality, as well as the affiliation of the author (authors) and make fair and independent of commercial or other interests decisions on scientific quality of manuscripts, to ensure an objective peer review process.
3. The editorial board may reject the manuscript without review if it considers that the materials do not correspond to the profile of the edition.
4. The editorial board of the Bulletin declares the inadmissibility of falsifications, plagiarism and self-plagiarism, submitting the materials of the same content to more than one scientific edition, deception of the public about the author’s personal contribution to the manuscript.
5. The editorial board may withdraw published materials if the violation of the norms of scientific ethics is legally proved, and the author and the organization where the research was performed will be notified.
6. The Chief Editor and members of the editorial board shall not disclose to third parties information on the content of the manuscript under consideration, except for those persons who participate in its scientific evaluation. After a positive decision of the Chief Editor, the article is published in the "Bulletin".
7. The peer review procedure should be objective, without financial, political, religious or other pressure. The editor and reviewers must respect the intellectual property of the authors.
8. If the editor is provided with convincing evidence of the inaccuracy of the materials published in the "Bulletin", he must publish a report on the identified shortcomings, which may be written by an independent author or the person who discovered them.
9. Prevention of pseudo-scientific publications is the responsibility of the author, editorial board, reviewer, and publisher.

Ethical guidelines for editors

• The editor-in-chief is fully responsible for the content and quality of published materials, management of the journal, compliance with ethical principles and publishing standards.
• Editor-in-chief has the right to make a sole decision on publication or rejection of manuscripts submitted to the journal.
• Editor-in-chief determines the academic and editorial policy of the journal, defines its goals and objectives and presents the journal in mass media and on the Internet.
• Editor-in-chief and members of the editoriak board are responsible for the high quality of the published papers as well as for journal compliance with international publication ethics standards, in particular with the Core Practices promulgated by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), in the Charter of the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv and the Ethical Code of the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv adopted at the conference of employees of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv on December 27, 2017 (Minutes № 2).

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

1. Research must be conducted in accordance with applicable law and ethics and be relevant to the scientific community.
2. Authors should formulate the basic postulates of their research without falsifying the obtained conclusions or manipulating them.
3. Authors of articles are responsible for the content of articles and for the very fact of their publication.
4. Authors should cite those sources, publications that reveal the essence of the issue and the history of its research. It is necessary to correctly indicate the sources of fundamentally important materials used in this work, if they were not obtained by the author himself.
5. Authors must comply with all applicable requirements for the publication of manuscripts. Plagiarism and self-plagiarism, for which the authors of the submitted materials are responsible, are unacceptable.
6. The authors of the manuscript are researchers who have contributed to the formulation of a scientific idea, problem statement and definition of research objectives, developed a concept; carried out data collection, structuring, analysis and interpretation; wrote and corrected the article. Each author is responsible for the content of the article. In an article written by several authors, the author who submits materials to the editorial board assumes responsibility for the agreement of other authors to their publication in the "Bulletin".
7. Authors should inform the editor of any conflict of interest that could be affected by the publication of the results contained in the manuscript.
8. Authors must clearly indicate the sources of all cited information, references to which must be made in accordance with the requirements. The editorial board has the right to refuse to publish the article in case of non-compliance with these requirements.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

1. Peer review of manuscripts has a "double blind" character. The reviewers are invited experts, the Chief Editor, Deputy Chief Editor and all the members of the editorial board.
2. Author’s supervisor(s), the scientific institution where the work was performed, one of the members of the editorial board of the Bulletin, as well as two independent experts must review the materials submitted for publication.
3. Reviewers should objectively evaluate the quality of the manuscript; find out how it meets high scientific and literary standards.
4. Reviewers must respect the intellectual property of the authors; must treat the manuscript submitted for peer review as a confidential document. Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information.
5. Reviewers must justify their comments; the statement that the authors use any previously published information without proper certification must be accompanied by an appropriate reference.
6. Reviewers should note any cases of insufficient citation by authors of other scientists’ works that are directly related to the peer reviewed manuscript.
7. Reviewers must provide one common response with their signatures in a timely manner.
8. Reviewers and the editorial board should take measures to identify and prevent the publication of works that do not comply with the ethics of publication, including detected plagiarism and self-plagiarism, manipulation of citations, and falsification of data. Available software is used to detect plagiarism (https://www.duplichecker.com; https://copyleaks.com/bususiness/plagiarism-checker-for-publishers, etc.).
9. Manuscripts that contain less than 25% plagiarism are sent to the authors for revision, and if more than 25% plagiarism, the manuscript is rejected without editorial peer review. Authors are encouraged to review textual borrowings and plagiarism of the manuscript and resubmit in a new manuscript. The percentage of plagiarism is calculated by the software and evaluated by the editorial board.