- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
Aim and Scope
The Journal was founded in order to introduce the latest scientific findings in research areas of history, archaeology, ethnography, philology, literature and journalism, primarily of Eurasia.
Its editorial policy is designed to select the most significant research papers on topical subject matters. The Editorial Board aims to provide:
- ethical practices of its own activities as well as in relation to relationships between all participants of the publication process (authors, reviewers, editors, publishers and readers),
- the highest possible level of anonymity of all submitted papers during the blind peer-review stages, including the assessment of the work’s authenticity and scientific significance, thematic relevance and compliance with legal rules regarding authors’ rights and plagiarism;
- treatment of each submission as a confidential document which is to be reviewed only by those authorized by the Executive Secretary of the particular issue.
The Journal consists of five separate issues published about the following fields: “History”, “Philology”, “Archaeology and Ethnography”, “Oriental Studies”, “Journalism”. Each of them accepts original research, as well as reports on important events in scientific life.
Section Policies
- Мария Берендеева
- Людмила Синякова
- Ольга Щеглова
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
- Татьяна Николаева
- Дмитрий Селин
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Publication Frequency
10 выпусков в год
Open Access Policy
"Vestnik NSU. Series: History and Philology" is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediatly upon publication.
Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.
For more information please read BOAI statement.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
Before submission, authors are required to read the Instructions to authors carefully and prepare the article accordingly. For article submission to the Secretary of the Editorial Board, the corresponding author needs to prepare two versions of the manuscript and provide them via the online submission system. The first file should include the title, abstract, body, references, keywords and information about the author and co-authors. The second file should consist only the full version of the text, the information about the author and co-authors should be removed (including full name, place of work, address, position, degree, references pointing to the other publications of the authors and co-authors, grants or acknowledgments, etc.). The journal uses the double-blind peer review. The editorial board appoints reviewers based on the subject of the article. Reviewers receive an anonymized version of the article and write reviews also anonymously. Reviews are sent to the author along with the decision of the editorial board. The anonymity is controlled by the Executive Secretary of the Editorial Board.
Publishing Ethics
Our Ethical Principles
The Advisory Board and Editorial Boards of thematic issues (hereinafter - the Board) of the scientific journal “Vestnik of Novosibirsk State University. Series: History and Philology” adhere to the principles of publication ethics accepted by the scientific community and its institutions: the Committee On Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Russian council for ethics of scientific publications - the Association of Science Editors and Publishers (ASEP).
The following individuals are included in the communication process from the initial stages of writing and submitting the article to the Journal prior to its publication and subsequent circulation: 1) Author, 2) Executive Editor of the series and Board of the thematic issue, 3) Reviewer, 4) Publisher, 5) Reader.
This section outlines the rules of interaction among participants of the publication process, aimed at observing the principles of objectivity, transparency and mutual respect.
Ethics for Authors
In accordance with the “Ethical Principles of Scientific Publications” declaration adopted at the General Meeting of ASEP (20 May 2016, Moscow), the Journal adheres to the following notion of authorship: “A person can be considered an author only if they have largely participated in the writing of the work, its concept, scientific design, the collection of material, analysis and interpretation.”
The Author understands that by signing the application form for publication of their article in the Journal, they enter into the scope of copyright related laws, which carry the following nature:
- The Author warrants that they are the author (co-author) of the article.
- The Author (team of co-authors) warrants that all author(s) who have made a significant contribution to the study are listed and there are no individuals who have been falsely credited.
- The Author is responsible for the authenticity of all facts, data and metadata reported in the article as well as the originality of research ideas and results set forth in the article.
- The Author warrants that the article does not contain plagiarism and is not self-plagiarized (i.e. duplication of an article already published or submitted to another publication), and that the quoted and/or abstracted ideas of other researchers are appropriately referenced.
- The Author warrants that all information obtained and used during the course of the research was done so legally, that their publication does not infringe upon the rights and interests of other individuals, and that information obtained in private is published with the written consent of the source.
- The Board in turn does not have the right to: publish an edited article without seeking the Author’s permission agreeing with any corrections, or share the Author's materials with third parties, with the exception of reviewers prior to its publication.
A published Author in the “Vestnik of Novosibirsk State University. Series: History and Philology” can be any of the following individuals:
– employees of scientific and scientific-educational organizations;
– post-graduate students of higher education institutions;
– students of higher education institutions in co-authorship with a supervisor:
- participating in research work on a project financed by grant funds (with a documentary confirmation of the student’s participation as an employee of the project’s research team);
- offering for publication historical sources of particular scientific value;
- participating in research expedition the presentation of the results of which has particular scientific value;
- in case of exceptional significance of the results of research conducted within a specific scientific discipline.
In all of these cases, the decision to accept an article for peer-review is made by a general decision of the Issues's editorial board with the participation of the Journal's editorial board, and if there is the justification for the scientific importance of the presented research.
– independent researchers.
In addition, by submitting an article to the Journal, the Author accepts to fulfill the following:
– respect all participants of the editorial and publishing process;
– respond in a timely manner to requests from the editorial team related to providing any supplementary data, formatting and text corrections including those that arise after review, or justifications in case of any disagreements between the Author and the Reviewer;
– notify the relevant editorial office if any errors or inaccuracies within the article come to light during or after the completion of the editorial and publishing process;
– if requested by the Board, after publication of the article in a timely manner provide evidence of the article’s authenticity and compliance with ethical standards during the conducting of research and publication of results, or alternatively correct mistakes and/or acknowledge that the article does not comply with ethical requirements.
Plagiarism
This section encompasses all instances of plagiarism (appropriation of someone else's work without proper attribution), including self-plagiarism (presenting own published work or their fragments as new and original).
Upon the Editorial Office’s receipt of the article and its verification for compliance with formal requirements, the Secretary of the relevant Journal issue will check the article’s originality using the Antiplagiat (http://antiplagiat.nsu.ru/) system which has access to the following databases:
– Russian State Library, existing theses;
– Internet (public pages);
– Legal Documents;
– Novosibirsk State University;
– Eastern Economic and Legal Humanitarian Academy.
Based on a range of factors (source, volume of plagiarism, originality, context), plagiarism and self-plagiarism may have different consequences.
1. The article is retracted (withdrawn) if:
– it is a reprinted publication of another author;
– it is a reprinted publication of the same author;
– it contains an exact match of text fragments longer than 100 words without source reference;
– it contains content such as, but not limited to: research data, conclusions, reasoning, tables or graphs belonging to another author without referencing them;
– its hypothesis and conclusions coincide with those of a previously published article of the same author;
– the article’s problems or conclusions contain verbatim or similar content fragments of text with absence of other problems and conclusions.
2. Correction of an article is published if:
– it contains a paraphrase of a significant fragment without referencing the original source;
– it contains a verbatim text fragment of less than 100 words without referencing the source, unless the fragment is widely known or standardized and is not being passed off as the Author's original idea (for example, the description of a widely applicable research technique or the formulation of a problem containing close thematic ties to an article source);
– it contains graphics such as tables and graphs belonging to another author with proper reference, but without written permission for their use.
3. An acceptable exception may arise if:
– the article contains standard non-original phrases or sentences describing widely used research procedures, especially if the Author is not a native speaker of the language in which the article is written.
Ethics for Reviewers
All materials (scientific articles, scientific information, reviews, and so on) received by the Journal’s Board are subject to compulsory review (at least 2 reviews per article). During the double-blind review process, the reviewers are not made aware of the Author's identity, and vise-versa.
As soon as he/she receives an article for review, the Reviewer must:
– Ensure they possess sufficient knowledge in order to review the manuscript.
– Ensure they can complete the review within the time limit set by the Board.
– Ensure there are no conflicts of interest given the possibility of the manuscript’s future publication.
– Ensure they have not previously or are not currently in the process of reviewing a similar manuscript for another journal.
If the Reviewer is in conflict with any of the above points, they must immediately decline the review, explaining their reasons or inform the issue Editor of the circumstances for a further decision to be made.
In the event of the Reviewer having a strong supposition about the identity of the manuscript’s Author, they must make the Editor aware of this in order to prevent a possible conflict of interest.
During the review process, the Reviewer must:
– conduct the review in good faith, objectively and constructively in order to aid the Author in improving their manuscript; reinforce their thoughts and conclusions with relevant arguments and references;
– store all information about the contents of the manuscript under review in secret;
– respect the Author of the article and avoid any insulting or humiliating comments directed at the Author(s) and/or other involved third parties;
– in the instances of any doubts about: the ethical conduct of the presented research, the absence of a conflict of interest, the qualifications needed to review the manuscript, as well as any circumstances preventing the completion of the peer review within the time frame established by the Board, the issue Editor must be notified immediately.
Conflicts of Interest
The Board considers conflicts of interest (dual obligations, competing interests) to be situations when a participant of the publication process is involved in a personal, scientific or financial relationship that may affect their actions.
In order to prevent conflicts of interest, the Board has established the following rules:
1) When submitting an article to the Board, the Author must correctly indicate their place(s) of work and any information regarding the financing of their research (if available).
2) The Reviewer must not have a conflict of interest with the Author of the article. This rule is provisioned by the following:
– double-blind review (the Reviewer is given the article without details of the Author, and the Author is not told the identity of the Reviewer);
– the Reviewer is selected, whenever possible, on the basis of him/her having no affiliation with the Author’s place of work;
– in cases where the standard procedures of the publication process make it impossible to keep the anonymity of the Author and Reviewer (for example, if the Author is also the Editor of the Journal issue), the article is then transferred to another member of the Board to appoint a new Reviewer;
– upon receipt of the article, the Reviewer must ensure they have no conflicts of interest in relation to the article and if a conflict is discovered, the Reviewer must report it to the Editor in order to appoint a new Reviewer.
3) If a conflict of interest is discovered after the publication of the article in the Journal, the Board must publish a correction message in the following issue.
Retractions and Corrections
1. Instances of use
In cases where adherence to procedures during the preparation of an article does not allow the editorial staff to prevent the publication of research results obtained unethically, the Board will set in motion its correction and retraction procedures.
The following are instances when such procedures will be set in motion:
– plagiarism, including self-plagiarism;
– duplication of the article in other/numerous publications;
– fabrication of data during the course of research;
– falsification of research results;
– violation of ethical standards during the course of research;
– incorrect list of authors.
2. Editorial investigation procedure
Guided by the recommendations of COPE, the Board adheres to the following procedures for retraction (withdrawal) and correction of articles:
2.1. The editorial investigation procedure can be initiated by written communication from a Reader, educational, scientific, public or State organization about plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data in the published article, as well as from the Author.
2.2. The Board establishes a Committee to get acquainted with the contents of the received communication in order to make a decision whether to initiate an editorial investigation. The Committee includes the Chairman of the Board, the Editor-in-Chief and the Executive Secretary of the series, two members of the Board, and the responsible Editor(s) and Secretary of the particular issue in which the article in question was published. In case of a conflict of interest if the Author of the article in question is one of the above persons, they are excluded from the Committee.
The Committee evaluates the credibility of the obtained information and makes a decision about whether to initiate or refuse an editorial investigation. In both cases, the Editors notify the sender of the message about the decision taken.
2.3. In case of a decision to initiate an investigation, the Board requests that the Author (and any co-authors) supply written explanations. The request will contain a notice of the discovery of the fact of research conducted in bad faith or plagiarism with supporting arguments (such as indication of the source of the plagiarized content or facts confirming the unfairness of conducted research procedures, and others).
The Board will also send a request to the affiliated organization listed in the article's metadata, in order for the organization to conduct an internal investigation.
The request is sent in electronic format from the address of the Coordinator of the series (d.ilina@g.nsu.ru) and will contain a scanned document signed by the Editor-in-Chief of the series with a date stamp of the day the letter is sent.
In addition, the Board also notifies the article reviewers about the commencement of the editorial investigation.
2.4. After receiving explanations from the Author(s) and/or their response, if the received information is in conflict with the reported offense, or alternatively if the Board has not received a response from either the Author or the affiliated organization two months after the initial requests were sent, the Committee meets again to decide on one of the following five possible resolutions:
– The article does not contain any elements of unfairly conducted research, does not violate ethical of article publication; no further actions are taken in regard to the article.
– The article contains minor and unintentional violations of the ethics of publication; the Author receives a warning notice, no further actions are taken in regard to the article.
– The article contains minor intentional violations of the ethics of publication; a correction is published.
– The article contains content in relation to results obtained in bad faith and/or seriously violates the ethical norms of article publication (with specification); the article is retracted, the Author is blacklisted for a period of two years.
– It proves impossible to make a reliable decision in relation to the article; the Board publishes notice of their doubts about the article and notifies the Author.
3. Publication of the editorial investigation results
When an article is withdrawn (retracted), the editorial team will:
1) Publish notice under the heading “Retracted (Withdrawn) Publication” in the next Journal issue indicating key information about the article (in Russian and English), the DOI, the initiator of the editorial investigation, foundation for the recall and date of its decision.
2) Replace the PDF file of the electronic version of the article with an updated file, where the first page of the document contains the heading “Article Retracted” as well as the date and URL of the published retraction statement.
3) Send the documented minutes of the Committee meeting to the council for ethics of scientific publications and all other scientific information databases in which the Journal is included.
When doubts have been expressed in relation to the article, the editorial team will:
1) Publish notice under the heading “Publication Doubts” in the next Journal issue indicating key information about the article (in Russian and English), the DOI, the initiator of the editorial investigation, foundation for publication doubts and date of its decision.
2) Replace the PDF file of the electronic version of the article with an updated file, where the first page of the document contains the heading “The Editorial Board Questions The Integrity of This Article” as well as the date and URL of the published statement of doubt.
3) Send the documented minutes of the Committee meeting to the council for ethics of scientific publications and all other scientific information databases in which the Journal is included.
When a correction has been made to the article, the editorial team will:
1) Publish notice under the heading “Publication Correction” in the next Journal issue indicating key information about the article (in Russian and English), the DOI, the initiator of the editorial investigation, the corrections referencing the original source and date of the decision.
2) Replace the PDF file of the electronic version of the article with an updated file, where the first page of the document contains the heading “Article Correction” as well as the date and URL of the published statement of correction.
3) Send the documented minutes of the Committee meeting to the council for ethics of scientific publications and all other scientific information databases in which the Journal is included.
Open Access
The Journal adheres to the policy of open access, according to which readers are given free access to full-text versions of its articles without a time delay.
Full-text versions of all articles can be accessed through the “Archive” website tab.
Founder
- Novosibirsk State University
Author fees
Publication in “Vestnik NSU. Series: History and Philology" is free of charge for all the authors.
The journal doesn't have any Article processing charges.
The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Plagiarism detection
"Vestnik NSU. Series: History and Philology" use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.
Preprint and postprint Policy
Prior to acceptance and publication in "Vestnik NSU. Series: History and Philology", authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.
As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted.
Papers that have been published as preprints in OSF Preprints, Preprints, PREPRINTS.RU, SocArXiv of another open archive, as well as at the website of the employer of the Author (Co-authors), are allowed to be taken to the review process. Please, when submitting the article, put the link to the preprint of it to the ‘Comments for the Editor’ field.
If the article passes the review process successfully, the Author(s) should put in the preprint the following note: “This manuscript has been accepted to the journal Vestnik NSU. Series: History and Philology (ISSN 1818-7919)”. After publishing, the Author should put the URL to the page with the metadata of the article at the website of the journal https://nguhist.elpub.ru/.
Glossary (by SHERPA)
