This paper highlights war effects on publication activities and scientific interests of Ukrainian researchers. Moreover, it presents the moods and motives of Ukrainian scientists regarding their scientific activity and the publication of their results in academic journals. The research method was a survey (Google Forms) distributed through Facebook professional groups “Ukrainian Scientists Worldwide,” “Ukrainian cuisine of scientific publications,” “Scientific Conferences and Publications,” and “Higher School and Science of Ukraine: Disintegration or Blossoming?” 690 Ukrainian scientists took part in the survey. Only 35.7% of the respondents stated that the war did not affect their research process. Results from respondents demonstrated that 27.7% of the respondents changed their scientific interests because of full-scale Russian aggression. Furthermore, scientists have psychological problems due to the loss of home, relatives, and relocation. The survey showed that motivation for publishing scientific articles varies from informing colleagues of their scientific results, scientific interest to motives distant from scientific values – “fulfillment of the requirements of the institution where I work,” “I do not want to be fired,” etc. 20.0% of the respondents noted that they had not got any motivation for scientific activity and publishing. At the same time, most scientists consider state security, debunking the propaganda of the Russian Federation, economic development, military medicine, ecology, education, social sphere, and agriculture to be the leading research areas. They also see the need to raise public awareness of the role of science and synchronize current multidisciplinary scientific research.

Abstract. Main objective. The article deals with the key factors of the virality of media content in social networks and technical university students' media literacy in social networks. Methodology. We analyzed the concept of virality and generalized the reasons that affect the popularity of the information posted in social networks. The three main groups of virality factors were singled out: content (its subject and form), the audience and the specific character of a social network. We have also analyzed the content of the three most popular Ukrainian media in Facebook: "Ukrayinska Pravda", "Hromadske TV" and "TSN" to define the virality factors in modern Ukrainian conditions. The study was conducted in National Technical University of Ukraine "Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute" (Kyiv, Ukraine). In addition quantitative analysis of 10 closed ended responses, qualitative analysis of 5 open ended responses and focus group discussion experts were done. The study population included students (n =1100) of the fourth course and 10 experts (professors in the fields of engineering (5 persons), pedagogics (2 persons) and social communications (3 persons)). Results and conclusions. Due to the study results there are few most popular content topics (politics, war in eastern Ukraine and basic needs) that cause the virality of information. Given the specificity of the algorithm for ranking posts in Facebook news line, we traced the reasons for the popularity of certain materials, which are caused by the situation in the country, emotions, induced by the publication, type of content and time of users' activity in the social network. The survey questionnaire captured the attitudes of students about the social networks and their role in everyday life and professional development, found out what 351Social media influence on public opinion and youth behavior percentage of students uses social networks for educational purposes, revealed whether the students trust to information from posts in social networks, as well as their reactions to messages. The qualitative analysis found out the reasons why students use or do not use social networks for their educational purposes, why are they joining or are not joining social networking groups that discuss political topics, why do they react or do not react on insults in social networks, why do they always (do not always) critically analyze information in social media, why do they think it is necessary (not necessary) to implement media literacy courses in the university. The focus group discussion revealed how social networks have influenced education, factors impacting social networks use for education, how the experts foresee the role of social networks in education and collected opinions about the media literacy as a part of engineering curriculum. Overall the observations found out weak spots in students' media literacy. Thus, it is necessary to implement media education in technical universities to teach students to become media "literate" in order to participate responsibl...

To find out how Ukrainian scholars view co-authorship, a Google form was posted on Facebook in professional communities. The survey was filled out by 198 scholars representing 24 fields. Among the main reasons for co-authorship, respondents identified the following: possibility of intellectual development, establishment of professional contacts, opportunity to save time, material rewards as a result of such publication, pressure of a manager who wants to have a publication but does not actually participate in the research, access to expensive equipment and materials, ability to share costs with all co-authors, bad English language skills, increased likelihood of being published with co-author authority, and more. We managed to get numerous answers illustrating the difficulties of preparing scientific publications in co-authorship: delays by other authors, reluctance of collaborators to take into account the comments of reviewers, the low requirements of some collaborators to itself, when they allow themselves to be published in “predatory journals”, problems during interpersonal communication, the need to include in the list of authors the people who did not participate in the writing of the article, long-term text alignment by co-authors, plagiarism, language problems, conflicting views on the results. Ethical problems arising from the co-authorship are revealed: the order of authors, distribution of scientific contribution, authorship of the administrative director, authorship of works performed under scientific supervision, etc.The article also addresses the problem of gift and guest authorship and elucidates the attitude of Ukrainian scientists to the services of companies that “guarantee” the publication of articles in international peer-reviewed journals.

Modern editor education in Ukraine is traditionally based on learning and reproducing of theoretical knowledge and doesn't account for all possible directions of a graduates` professional career. The author analyses the requirements of the labour market to the competences of the graduates of editing specialities, proposes and justifies the necessity of using the methods of tea ching in which the knowledge is acquired in the context of professional activity. Four main skills of a modern editor which should be formed during the learning process are singled out, namely: 1) working with information; 2) interaction with people; 3) opera tion in a narrow time frame; 4) using the existing experience to acquire new knowledge, solve new tasks under new conditions, unusual situations. So-called active learning, associated with the involvement of participants of learning process into different kinds of activities, is the most effective to form the above mentioned skills. The research proves the efficiency of such organizational forms and methods of learning activities as round tables, group discussions, conferences, case study, editoria l analysis, modeling of editorial and publishing processes, interviews, teamwork, analysis of publications, mini-lectures, video trainings, presentations, simulation games, analysis of problematic cases and atypical errors etc. These methods allow studen ts to develop flexibility of thought, adaptation to real work situations, initiative, autonomy in decision-making and at the same time the ability to work in a team, creative approach to problem-solving. The result of using these teaching methods with the elements of competition, autonomy at the lesson, peer evaluation is the formation of professional and personal qualities, understanding the need for ongoing professional self-education. All these methods of learning activities of students got approval in the questionnaires and group discussions.

A survey of Ukrainian scholars on the Ukrainian academic journals' level and their experience in interacting with editiorial boards of academic journals, which are indexed in Web of Science and Scopus, has been conducted in the Ukrainian Scientists Worldwide group on Facebook by filling out the Google form. In total, 296 scientists from different fields took part in the survey. The questionnaire allowed to gather various, often diametrically opposed, thoughts about why scientists publish (do not publish) their articles in journals included to Web of Science or Scopus; what the main reviewers' comments on their articles were; for what reason the Ministry of Education and Science requires scholars to have articles in academic journals included to international databases; who is financing the publication fee; how important the knowledge of foreign languages for the preparation of scientific papers is; how the authors interact with the editors during the editorial and publishing process; what the main researchers' motivation to write scientific articles is; how scholars evaluate the practice, when people who are not actually co-authors of the articles are added as co-authors by agreement; how the authors refer to plagiarism and on the basis of which criteria researchers select a journal for publication. The results of the survey have shown contradictory tendencies of Ukrainian researchers' publication activity. On the one hand, it is a desire to reach the international level, to gain recognition, an attempt to adhere to high standards, to improve own skills. On the other hand, pursuit of quantitative indicators, low motivation, violations of academic integrity, low level of proficiency in the languages of international scientific communication. In pursuit of quantity there is no place for scientific values, such as novelty, uniqueness, informativeness.

The authors discuss the issues and benefits of collaborative writing in journalistic education, comparing the texts written by students in different conditions: in group collaboration, individually after prewriting group discussion, and individually without any collaboration. We used a survey for collecting both quantitative and qualitative data. The participants were 21 second year and 15 third-year students, who wrote 18 fiction stories for preschool children (3 were written in the collaborative writing groups of 4, where the students were allowed to choose partners for small groups; 3 in the collaborative writing groups of 4, where the students were not allowed to choose partners; 6 after prewriting group discussion, and 6 without any collaboration). 12 six-year students evaluated delivered texts. We also interviewed 12 teachers of the Department of Publishing and Editing about the collaborative writing tasks at the meeting of the Department. Teachers’ interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed. The students and teachers expressed positive attitudes towards collaborative writing, that contributes to students’ learning outcomes and prepare them for teamwork. The highest score got the texts written individually after the prewriting discussion. The stories written by the students who were allowed to choose partners in a group work gained higher scores than texts prepared in randomly created groups. The participants in the self-selected conditions reported that they enjoyed а high level of participation, sharing the workload and supportive behaviour. We also observed the evidences of unequal participation of students in collaboration in small groups where the partners were not familiar. The lowest average score got the texts written with no collaboration. So, we proved that there is a need for implementing prewriting group discussions in the learning process. It is necessary to differentiate the role of each student in collaborative writing to evaluate individual results correctly.

The research evaluates the effectiveness of using electronic textbooks in educational process compared to printed publications. The advantages and disadvantages of introducing e-textbooks in higher education institutions are determined. The problems that students face while working with e-textbooks are outlined. Based on the literature analysis, the authors claim that e-textbooks are more convenient and are being increasingly used in the educational process. A standardised questionnaire including 17 questions was developed by authors to determine students' and teachers' perceptions of using e-textbooks in educational process. Data analysis tools comprise the methods of mathematical and descriptive statistics. According to the survey, users want to get cheap but highquality e-textbooks, with a high level of production, without errors, and with completeness of information. The price and the quality play a crucial role in decision making. Also, the criterion of e-textbooks friendliness is of great importance, including ease of search, the ability to navigate by hyperlinks, and adaptive layout for different devices. The problem of standardisation of e-textbooks may be the subject of further research and practical development.

The purpose of the paper is to summarize the organizational and ethical aspects, problems and prospects of peer reviewing. To do this, from September 2019 to January 2020, a survey of Ukrainian scientists registered in Facebook groups “Ukrainian Scientific Journals”, “Ukrainian Scientists Worldwide”, “Pseudoscience News in Ukraine”, “Higher Education and Science of Ukraine: Decay or Blossom?” and others was conducted. In total, 390 researchers from different disciplines participated in the survey. The results of the survey are following: 8.7% of respondents prefer open peer review, 43.1% – single-blind, 37.7% – double blind, 9.2% – triple blind, 1.3% used to sign a review prepared by the author. 75.6% of respondents had conflicts of interest during peer reviewing. 8.2 % of reviewers never reject articles regardless of their quality. Because usually only editors and authors see reviews, it can lead to the following issues: reviewers can be rude or biased; authors may not adequately respond to grounded criticism; editors may disregard the position of the author or reviewer, and journals may charge for publishing articles without proper peer review.