Requirements for the materials offered for publication in the «Russian Economic Journal»
Problematic of the contributions (articles) should focus on one of the points, that are listed among the headings of edition and are completely presented on the webpage "About the journal".
The following points are the main criteria by which the editors decide whether to accept any publication: relevance of the issue; originality of the methods of solving the problem (the elements of scientific novelty, "increment of knowledge"), the validity and the practical orientation of these methods.
It is strongly recommended to look through the publications on relevant issues of the journal when preparing the contributions (maximum retrospectively, if possible) and somehow respond to them – in the text and (or) in the footnotes.
All the materials may be sent to the editor through Internet or by post (on paper and digital carrier). It is necessary to enclose information about the author(s) (surname, first name and patronymic, place of employment, academic degrees and titles, email and postal addresses, telephone).
Editors asks authors: to make maximum references on sources used (for monographs: to point out publisher, place and year of publication); to make a brief summary and a list of key words in Russian and English languages; to structure the text (detached introductory remarks and summarizing fragments, clearly entitled sub-paragraphs). Approximate size for main articles – 40 thousand characters.
Editors enter into correspondence with authors, if needed.
Providing an article for publication means the transfer of publication rights to the publisher on the territory of the Russian Federation and foreign countries, including the publication on the Internet.
Procedure of reviewing
- Research papers, received by editorial board, answering the subjects of the journal, prepared in accordance with the requirements, undergo a peer-reviewing procedure.
- In case of rejection of sending a manuscript to revision, author receives a reasoned reply.
- We examine only previously unpublished manuscripts.
- At author's discretion, external review can be presented when submitting an article. This does not exclude the usual procedure of reviewing.
- Chief editor determines, whether an article answers the subject of the journal and meets the requirements, and forward it to reviewing to examination with PhD or ScD degree, who is a recognized expert on the subject of peer-reviewed material and who has own publications on the subject for the last 3 years.
- Reviewers are notified, that tall manuscript are the property of authors and contain information, that should not be disclosed. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of articles. Reviewing is confidential. Breach of confidentiality is possible only when there is a statement for invalidity or falsification of materials. In all other cases it's preservation is obligatory.
- Manuscript is passed to a reviewer without any information about the authors.
- Time constraints for the procedure of reviewing is defined by the chief editor, individually for each case. Maximum reviewing period (between the date of acceptance of the manuscript by the editor till the editorial board makes it's decision) is 2 months.
- The following items are pointed out in the review:
a) a compliance of the matter of an article with it's title;
b) an assessment of the relevance of the content of a manuscript;
c) an assessment of the form of the presented materials;
d) an appropriateness of publishing an article;
e) a description of the advantages and disadvantages of an article.
In the final part of the review of the manuscript, on the basis of it's analysis, clear conclusions should be given, whether the publication can be published as is, or there is a need for its revision or processing (with constructive comments).
- If the review contains recommendations for editing and (or) finalizing an article, it is sent to an author with a proposal to take into account the recommendations in preparing a new version of an article or arguments to refute them. An improved paper is sending back for reviewing.
- In a case, where the reviewer does not recommend an article to publication, editorial board may send back an article to be rewritten, taking into account the comments made on it, as well as send it to another reviewer. Text of a negative review is also sent to an author.
- Manuscripts, which receives contradictory reviews, should be forwarded to an additional reviewing. If a manuscript receives two negative reviews, publisher has a right to reject the submitted manuscript immediately and not to publish it.
- The final decision on publication of an article is taken by the chief editor together with the scientific editor .
- When a positive decision on publishing an article is taken, the author is informed. Text of a review is sent to an author via Internet.
- Originals of the reviews are stored at the editorial office for five years.
- On demand of the Ministry of Education and Science, the reviews are also sent to the Higher Attestation Commission and / or the Ministry.
- The editors do not undertake any obligation on time constraints of publishing the manuscript.
- Not prescribed to an obligatory reviewing:
– interviews and reports from the round tables, conferences, etc.;
– news , information and advertising messages and announcements.
In order to improve the quality of publications and authors’ intellectual property rights and prevent unfair practices in publishing activities, the editorial board of the journal is guided by the principles of publication ethics, developed on the basis of international standards, in particular: the provisions and Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
The editorial board, authors, reviewers, publisher, as well as institutions involved in the publishing process are bound by the ethical standards, rules and regulations and take all reasonable measures to prevent violations.
The fundamental principles of journals publishing
• Compliance with publishing and editorial ethics.
• Compliance with the guidelines when rejecting articles.
• Prevention of damaging intellectual and ethical standards if there are commercial interests.
• Prevention of publishing of plagiarized articles and fraudulent data.
• Readiness, if necessary, to publish corrections, clarifications, rejections and apologies.
Ethics of authorship of scientific publications
An author (or a group of authors) realizes he or she bears primary responsibility for novelty and reliability of research results which implies compliance with the following principles:
• Authors of an article must provide reliable results of conducted studies. Knowingly erroneous or fraudulent statements are unacceptable.
• Authors must ensure that results of a study set out in a submitted manuscript are completely original. Format of borrowed fragments or statements must contain an indication of the author and the source. In the case of using fragments of others' works and/or other authors' statements, corresponding bibliographic references must be formatted to contain a mandatory indication of the author and the source.
• It is necessary to acknowledge a contribution of every person who in one way or another influenced the course of a research, in particular, references to the works that mattered when conducting a research must be presented in an article.
• Authors must not submit a manuscript that was sent to another journal and is under consideration, as well as an article that has already been published in another journal.
• All persons who have made a significant contribution to a research must be listed as co-authors. It is unacceptable to list persons who did not participate in the research among co-authors.
• Authors must necessarily disclose conflicts of interest that can influence an assessment and interpretation of their manuscripts, as well as sources of financial support (grants, governmental programs, projects, etc.).
• Authors must immediately notify the editorial board of the journal if they find an error in any work submitted or accepted for publication, as well as in any already published work, and contribute to correction of an error. Authors must immediately correct an error or provide evidence of its absence if the editorial board finds out about an error from third parties.
• Authors must comply with the copyright protection legal norms; materials protected by copyright (for example, tables, figures or large quotations) may only be reproduced with the owner's permission.
• Authors must adhere to ethical principles, when criticizing or commenting a third-party research.
• Authors must respect the work of the editorial board and peer reviewers and address indicated shortcomings or explain it reasonably.
• Authors must provide and format a manuscript in compliance with the guidelines.
Peer review ethics
A peer reviewer conducts a scientific examination of authors' materials and therefore his actions must be impartial that means observing the following principles:
• A manuscript received for review must be viewed as a confidential document, which cannot be handed over to third parties for familiarization or discussion, if they are not authorized by the editorial board.
• Violation of confidentiality is only possible in a case of statement of authenticity or falsification of materials, in all other cases, its preservation is required.
• Peer reviewers are not allowed to make copies of manuscripts for their needs.
• A peer reviewer must give an objective and reasoned assessment of presented results of a research aimed at improving the scientific level of a manuscript. Personal criticism of an author is unacceptable.
• A peer reviewer must draw an editor-in-chief’s attention to a substantial or partial similarity between a manuscript under consideration and any other work, as well as to a lack of references to statements, conclusions or arguments previously published in the author’s or other’s works.
• A peer reviewer must note published works that are not cited (in an article).
• A peer reviewer must notify the journal if he finds any conflicts of interest or any other circumstances prevent him from forming a fair and impartial assessment of an article.
• A peer reviewer who believes that he is not an expert on issues considered in an article or that he will not be able to submit an article review must immediately inform the editorial Board about his inability to review a submitted article.
• Independent peer reviewers are informed of the requirements for them and provided information about any changes in editorial policy.
• The editorial Board protects the confidentiality of peer reviewers’ personal data.
Ethics of Scientific publications editing
In its activities, the editorial office, the staff of the editorial-publishing group and the members of the editorial Board are responsible for disclosure of authors’ works, which requires compliance with the following principles:
• The editorial Board publishes information materials for authors (the list of necessary requirements for article format, the procedure for article consideration and review) on the website of the journal.
• The editorial Board decides on acceptance or rejection of publications based on the results of an inspection of a manuscript for compliance with the requirements for format as well as results of the review. Editorial board has the right to reject the publication of an article with signs of slander, insult, plagiarism or copyright violations.
• The final decision on the publication of an article or refusal of such is accepted by the editor-in-chief along with scientific editor of the journal. A decision and reasons for it are communicated to authors.
• The editorial board ensures confidentiality, i.e. undertakes not to disclose the an information about a submitted manuscript to anyone except respective authors, peer reviewers, other editorial advisers and, if required, the publisher.
• The editorial board ensures a confidential, independent, honest and objective review of manuscripts, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship, social status or political preferences of authors.
• The editorial board selects peer reviewers, who are independent in relation to materials considered for publication, experienced enough and have no conflict of interests.
• The editorial board ensures and improves the quality of published materials, meets the needs of readers and authors, makes a significant contribution to the development of national and foreign science.
• The editorial board uses the following indicators of high quality for published research materials: compliance with the theme of the journal, relevance, scientific importance, novelty, clarity, completeness of provided materials, balance, originality, reliability of results and completeness of conclusions.
• The editorial board commits to eliminate the influence of business or political interests on decision-making about publishing materials and prevent commercial interests from compromising intellectual and ethical standards.
• The editorial board is working to attract and include highly qualified professionals, actively contributing to the development of the journal.
• The editorial board is constantly improving the processes of reviewing, editing and publication evaluation by experts.
• The editorial board ensures careful consideration of publications for image manipulation, plagiarism, duplicate or redundant publication.
• The editorial board commits to take all corrective measures, if they find factual, grammatical, stylistic or any other errors.
• The editorial board coordinates all editorial corrections in an article with an author.
• The editorial board ensures that materials of manuscript rejected for publication will not be used in the editorial board members’ own researches without the author’s written consent.
• The editorial board commits to promptly consider every complaint about unethical behavior of authors of manuscripts and already published articles, regardless of the time of delivery. It commits to undertake appropriate reasonable measures in respect of such complaints. If the complaint is confirmed, the editorial board has the right to reject publication of the article, cease further cooperation with the author, publish a retraction, and take other necessary measures to further curb unethical behaviour of this author.
• In order to ensure reliability of published data, if there are indisputable errors in the work, it is possible to promptly publish corrections, clarifications, rejections and apologies.
• With the change of editor-in-chief new editor should not overrule the decisions of previous editors with the exception of cases when such serious problems as plagiarism or falsification are identified.
Ethics of scientific articles publishing
In carrying out his activities the publisher is responsible for publishing authors’ works, which implies the necessity of adhering to the following principles:
• The publisher encourages the editorial board, peer-reviewers and authors to fulfill ethical obligations in compliance with these requirements.
• The publisher must support the journal’s editorial board in consideration of complaints about ethic aspects of published materials and help to cooperate with other journals and/or publishers, scientific and research organizations and industry associations on the issues relating to ethical problems, tracking errors and publishing denials in particular.
• The publisher ensures well-timed publication of the journal.
• The publisher ensures confidentiality of submitted manuscript and any information until its publishing.
• The publisher must be ready to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.
• The publisher must make it possible for the editorial board to exclude publications containing plagiarism and false data.
• The publisher undertakes to publish information about financial support for a research, if an author gives such information to an article.
Declaration on conflict of interest
• Authors must disclose conflicts of interests that could affect the evaluation and interpretation of their manuscripts, as well as the sources of financial support for the project (grants, state programs, projects, etc.), which should be necessarily indicated in the manuscript.
• The editorial board selects peer reviewers, who are independent in relation to materials considered for publication, experienced enough and have no conflict of interests.
• A peer reviewer has no right to use unpublished manuscript materials in his own research without the author’s written consent.
• A peer reviewer must refrain from examining a manuscript, in connection with which he has a conflict of interest because of competitive, cooperative or other relationship with the an author or organization related to the manuscript.
• If publication ethics is breached by the editor, authors or peer reviewer, a mandatory investigation is required. This applies to both published and unpublished materials. The editorial board must demand clarification, without involving those who may have a conflict of interest with one of the parties.
• If the material containing significant inaccuracies has been published, it must be modified immediately in a way accessible to readers and indexing systems.