1. Publications and authorship:
1.1. Articles must meet the requirements of a Scientific Bulletin;
1.2. All articles are peer-reviewed independently and secretly: reviewers receive encrypted articles, and the authors are not revealed the identity of the reviewer;
1.3. Plagiarism and fraud are not allowed in the articles;
1.4. Submitted articles must not have been published elsewhere.

2. Author's Responsibilities:
2.1. Authors must submit materials for publication in the Scientific Bulletin, prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Editorial Board;
2.2. The authors are responsible for the views, opinions, results, and conclusions expressed in the articles;
2.3. The authors are responsible for the reliability of the information in the articles, the accuracy of titles, names, and citations;
2.4. Authors' materials that contain insulting statements, aggression or national, religious, racial and other discrimination and can lead to ethnic and racial hatred, violate international legal norms and legislation are not accepted for consideration;
2.5. Authors for publication in the Scientific Bulletin must submit materials that reflect the original results of the research.
2.6. Authors are responsible for detecting plagiarism in their submissions; plagiarism in all its forms is considered unethical behavior and is unacceptable;
2.7. Submission of articles by authors means automatic agreement with the passing of the double-blind peer review procedure;
2.8. Authors for publication in the Scientific Bulletin should present articles that have not been previously published or submitted for publication in any other publications. When using materials already published or presented in other journals in the article, the authors must give references to them. Authors must also inform the Editorial Board about their own articles already published in other journals, which are thematically close to the materials submitted for consideration;
2.9. The authors are obliged to make corrections to the article in accordance with the reviewer's remarks.

3. Responsibilities of reviewers:
3.1. Reviewers must review all submissions according to specific criteria. Articles must be reviewed within a period not exceeding 2 weeks. Otherwise, the reviewers should inform the Editorial Board of the Bulletin about the impossibility of reviewing;
3.2. Reviewers should conduct constructive, comprehensive, thorough reviews of all materials, regardless of the race, religion, nationality, gender, or institutional affiliation of the author(s);
3.3. Reviewers must review submissions independently, objectively, and confidentially; personal criticism of the author(s) is not allowed;
3.4. Reviewers must be appropriately qualified to review articles;
3.5. Reviewers are required to inform the editor immediately of articles that contain plagiarism or false information;
3.6. Reviewers are forbidden to use in their own research any part of the material that is in the review and is not published. This is accepted only with the permission of the author(s);
3.7. Reviewers must not have a conflict of interest with the author(s) and/or editor(s).

4. Responsibilities of the Editorial Board:
4.1. The editors should send the results of the review, comments and recommendations to the author(s) by e-mail within no more than 2 months; documentation containing the results of the review of materials submitted for consideration should be kept in the Editorial Board of the Bulletin;
4.2. Editors are forbidden to use any part of the submissions in their research. This is acceptable only with the permission of the author(s);
4.3. Editors should guarantee the confidentiality of the review procedure; editors should not disclose the names and other data of authors and reviewers without their permission;
4.4. It is the responsibility of the editors to consider any complaints, questions, or suggestions from authors and reviewers;
4.5. The editors have the right to reject articles if they do not correspond to the theme of the Bulletin;
4.6. The editors have the right to make the final decision on the publication of the article in the Scientific Bulletin, taking into account its originality, novelty, and compliance with the requirements of the publication;
4.7. It is forbidden for the editors to oblige authors to make references to materials already published in the Bulletin.

5. Publication Ethics Issues:
5.1. The Bulletin's ethics policy is designed to combat plagiarism, unethical experimentation, data tampering, and conflicts of interest;
5.2. The Editorial Board is obliged to publish corrections, clarifications, reviews, and apologies when necessary;
5.3. All articles are reviewed according to criteria such as originality, relevance, innovation, significance of results in their field, theoretical basis and review of existing research and publications, literacy, accuracy, significance, readability, and writing style;
5.4. According to the results of reviewing one of the following decisions can be made: to publish as is; to publish with minor changes; to send for a second review (if significant changes are needed); to refuse (if significant revision is needed, but the author is able to submit revised material again); to refuse without permission to resubmit (if the material has fundamental flaws, contains plagiarism or does not meet the subject of the publication);
5.5. The Editorial Board assumes responsibility for dealing with ethical violations by any participant in the publishing process.

6. Changes and amendments to the Editorial Policy:
6.1. The Editorial Board may make changes and additions to the Editorial Policy to improve and enhance the publication and publishing process.

RETRACTION POLICY

The Editorial Board follows retraction policy to warn readers about self-plagiarism (authors submit the same data in several journals), academic plagiarism, fabrication, and falsification, disguise the conflicts of interests, which would affect the interpretation of data or recommendations for their use. The retraction of the scientific article is the mechanism of correcting published data and alerting readers about articles with serious gaps or invalid content, incl. unreliable one. The publication of such data may be accidental or intentional misconduct.

The retraction’s goal is to inform readers about the article which contains unreliable data.
Based on the Recommendations of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), journal staff is guided by the below policy of retraction of previously published articles.

Editors should consider retracting a publication if:
- it contains material or data without authorization for use;
- the research findings have previously been published;
- the article has serious errors (e.g., the misinterpretation of research findings) which call into question scientific value;
- authorship is invalid (the inclusion of persons who do not meet the authorship criteria, or no one is worth being the author);
- the author(s) failed to disclose a conflict of interests (as well as other violations of publication ethics);
- the article was republished with the consent of the author(s);
- there are other violations of ethics.

Grounds for initiating article retraction:
- the author’s request to retract the article;
- the request of the third parties (e.g., participants in the conflict of interests) who have evidence of the violations of academic ethics by the author of the article published in the journal;
- the editorial board has found ethics violations by the article’s author.

The Academic Integrity Commission of Kherson State University decides about article retraction by relying on the decision of the Editorial Board.

Information on article retraction is available on the journal’s web-site.

The surname(s) of the author(s) and article title are kept in the contents of the relevant issue on the journal’s web-site, but reasons for retractions are specified.

The decision reasoning article retraction is sent to the author (s).