Home » Publications » Visnyk of the National Bank



The journal ensures that publication ethics standards are complied with, preventing any unethical practices when making acceptance/rejection decisions, reviewing, or publishing papers. All authors, reviewers, and editorial board members also must comply with publication ethics standards such as guidelines provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Ethical Guidelines for Authors

Authors should acknowledge that a submitted manuscript is original, it has not been published before, and has been submitted solely to this journal.

Authors are required to confirm that their submissions contain final and verified data. At the request of editors, authors should be able to provide the data they used in their calculations, models, and forecasts in order to verify results and findings of the investigation or to prove the data’s validity.

Manuscripts should include a reasonable number of facts and bibliographical references to provide grounds for findings.

Any form of plagiarism is unethical and unacceptable. In the case of plagiarism, the submission will be rejected.

Author(s) must inform the publishing editors of the journal and make all efforts to correct errors revealed at any stage of preparing the article for publication.

Ethical Guidelines for Editors

A final decision on whether to accept or reject a paper for publication in the Visnyk of the NBU is made by Editors based on the importance, originality, intellectual content, clarity, and relevance of the paper, regardless of their personal views, scientific views, or any author’s gender, race, ethnicity, or nationality.

Editors should ensure there is no breach of law, plagiarism, and copyright violations.

Editorial Board members should respect and protect the confidentiality of reviewers and the author(s).

Editors should take all steps to avoid conflicts of interest between a reviewer and an author.

Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

All manuscripts that are received for review must be treated as confidential.

Reviewers should avoid using information obtained in the peer-review process for their personal benefit.

Reviewers should decline to review a submission if they feel unable to provide a good review for various reasons (e.g., they have no subject expertise or have no access to data required, etc.).

Reviewers should express their views clearly, objectively, and constructively in their reports. Personal criticism of authors and baseless judgments are inappropriate.

Reviewers should inform the Editors about any plagiarism.

Reviewers should declare all potential conflicts of interests.

Reviewers cannot be:

- the heads of organizations, educational institutions, staff from the departments, laboratories, or other subdivisions in which the authors work;

- subordinates or relatives of the authors;

- co-authors of previously published articles and current submissions;

- scientific supervisors of the authors.