EDITORIAL POLICY AND PEER REVIEW PROCESS

EDITORIAL POLICY

Providing readers with access to quality materials in the collection

The journal is an open access publication. This means that all of its content is in a free, free-of-charge access for users. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to full articles in this journal without requesting permission from the publisher or author. The above corresponds to the definition of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) for open access. Copyrights for printed materials are retained by the authors. The author bears full responsibility for the content of the printed article and the reliability of the results presented therein.

Orientation to the coverage of a wide range of issues of historical science

The objective of the journal is to promote the publication of the results of scientific researches by leading scientists, post-graduates, doctoral students and applicants for scientific degrees and academic titles. The disclosure of this objective ensures coordination of fundamental scientific research of specialists and promotes their actualization. The results of scientific research, review articles, discussion materials, reviews in various fields of historical science are published in the Journal.

Support for ongoing publication activity

The priority of the journal is to ensure a constant regularity of the release of new issues (issued regularly in December of the current year).

Encouraging printing high-quality publications and supporting the model of exemplary scientific ethics in publications.

The journal supports basic ethical requirements for the scientific publications of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). These requirements establish the basic rules of conduct and responsibilities of members of any professional scientific community in relation to each other and to the public. They also ensure the right of each author to intellectual property. All persons involved in the publication process (editors, authors, and reviewers) should be guided by the principles of ethics in scientific publications. The editorial board and reviewers review all the manuscripts submitted to the publication without prejudice, evaluating each one properly, regardless of race, religion, nationality or workplace of the author.

Ensuring the quality of the articles is an effective tool for its review

The rules for the preparation of articles for the publication provide the opportunity to print articles to any scientist in the event of their compliance with the quality requirements of materials. Only actual articles that contain elements of scientific novelty and of practical significance are accepted for publication. The purpose of the procedure for controlling the articles adopted for publication is to: ensure the compliance of the materials with the requirements of the scientific style of presentation; stimulation of a more responsible attitude of the authors of the publication to the novelty of the presented materials and the objectivity of the citation; to achieve high level of curiosity of printed materials for the national and world scientific community.

The orientation of the interaction of the authors with the editorial board on the improvement of the quality of the articles submitted for publication.

The review procedure involves working with internal experts of the journal that are recognized experts in the relevant field of knowledge. For this purpose, in addition to the members of the editorial board, the journal collaborates with a wide range of scholars. The article is accepted for publication only after its discussion at the meeting of the editorial board of the journal with a positive expert review and support of the majority of the members of the editorial board who are experts in the same field of knowledge as the author of the article. In the case of a substantiated refusal, the review and decision of the editorial board are given to the authors in writing, enabling him/her to revise the article or substitute it with other material.

Combating biased citation

At submitting materials for consideration, the percentage of originality of the author's text that is submitted to the editorial board meeting when determining the possibility of placing the article in the collection is determined.

Priority of entering articles into the world information sphere

The journal publishes innovative (exclusive) articles in Ukrainian and English (at the author's choice), not intended for publication in other editions. In order to provide the scientific community access to the authors' work, the texts of articles are posted on the site of the publication and work is done on their inclusion in bibliographic and abstract databases.

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

The process of reviewing of articles submitted to the journal is carried out in order to identify the degree of their originality, relevance and scientific expediency and compliance with the concept of the publication through the evaluation of materials by highly qualified experts.

The purpose of the review procedure is to eliminate cases of poor research practices and to ensure that the interests of authors, readers, editorial board, reviewers.

The review process is based on the requirements of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (COPE), experience and best practices of leading editorial and scientific communities, which helps to overcome bias and increase objectivity in reviewing submitted articles.

The editorial board uses the procedure of Double-Blind Peer Review in its work. Authors do not know the names of the Reviewers; Reviewers are not informed of the names of the Authors. The interaction between the Reviewers and the Authors is carried out only through the authorized members of the editorial office. Reviewing is based on confidentiality. Information about the article (terms of receipt, content, stages and features of reviewing, comments of reviewers and the final decision on publication) is not communicated to anyone except the authors and reviewers.

The processes of reviewing and consideration of the manuscripts of the articles are transparent and carried out under the general rules for all authors and reviewers.

The terms of reviewing are determined by the order and the number of manuscripts submitted to the editor, but not more than 7 working days from the date of submission of materials.

All articles submitted to the editorial board are reviewed, except for reviews and informational messages.

The articles of the Editorial Board members are subject to the standard procedure of external independent review organized by the Editor-in-Chief. The members of the editorial board do not participate in the review of their own manuscripts.

Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of the article submitted for review or to use information from the content of the article prior to its publication.

The order of accepting manuscripts:

Primary control of submitted to the journal: compliance with all formal requirements for the subject, scientific profile, content, structure, scope and order of articles. n case of non-compliance with formal requirements, materials of articles may be returned to the authors immediately for revision in order to bring them into compliance with these requirements.
All submitted materials are checked to determine the level of uniqueness of the author's text using special software. Manuscripts in which plagiarism or text borrowing without references to the original source are found,will be rejected by the editorial board.
After initial review of the manuscript of the article by the editorial board and the plagiarism check, the manuscript is sent for peer review.
Manuscripts submitted to the Editorial Board shall be forwarded to two reviewers. Editor-in-Chief of the journal appoints the reviewers. The editor-in-chief (deputy editor-in-chief) defines an expert reviewer who has a specialization relevant to the subject of the article, is a specialist in this field of research and has publications on this or related topics (preferably for the last 5 years). The reviewer is chosen either from the members of the editorial board or drawn from the outside.
The reviewer evaluates the possibility of reviewing the manuscript. At the same time, he takes into account the compliance of his own qualifications with the content of the materials. He also makes sure that there is no conflict of interest. In the event of any competing interests, the reviewer should waive the review and notify the editorial board. The latter must decide on the appointment of another reviewer.
The reviewer sends to the editorial board a conclusion on the appropriateness or inappropriateness of the article's publication.
Based on the results of the expert evaluation of a scientific article, the reviewer may:
- recommend the article for publication without further elaboration;
- recommend the article for publication, after revision by its author taking into account the comments and wishes of the reviewer;
- recommend the article for publication only after a radical revision, taking into account comments;
- not recommend the article for publication.
If the reviewer recommends the article for publication after its revision, radical revision or does not recommend the article for publication, the review should indicate the reason for such a decision.
The editors of the journal send the author a review with the results of the analysis of the article by e-mail.
If the reviewer indicates the need to make certain corrections to the article, the article is sent to the author with the suggestion to take into account the comments when preparing an updated version of the article or to substantiate their refutation. By the revised article, the author adds a letter that contains answers to all comments and explains all the changes that were made in the article. The corrected version is re-submitted to the reviewer for the decision and the preparation of a motivated conclusion about the possibility of publication. The date of aception of the article for publication is the date of receipt by the editorial staff of a positive opinion of the reviewer (or the decision of the editorial board) regarding the expediency and the possibility of publishing the article.
If the author does not agree with the opinion of the reviewer, he has the right to provide a reasoned answer to the editors of the journal. In this case, the article is considered at the meeting of the working group of the editorial board. The editorial board may direct the article for additional or new review to another specialist. The editorial board reserves the right to reject articles in case of insolvency or unwillingness of the author to take into account the propositions and comments of reviewers. At the request of the reviewer, the editorial board may submit the article to another reviewer.
The final decision on the possibilities and expediency of publication is made by the editor-in-chief (or a member of the editorial board, if appointed by the editor-in-chief). УIf necessary, such a decision is made at a meeting of the editorial board. If a decision has been made to allow the article for publication, the Executive Secretary shall notify the author and indicate the expected date of publication.
A positive decision about the possibility of publishing the article ensures its inclusion in the editorial portfolio of the journal.
The article approved for publication is provided to the technical editor. He may make minor stylistic or formal corrections that do not affect the content of the article, without the consent of the author. Manuscripts in the form of a layout of the article are returned to the author for approval at the request of the author.
At the request of the author, the editorial board may provide him with a certificate of acceptance of the article for publication signed by the editor-in-chief.
If the author refuses to correct the reviewer's comments, the article is not allowed to be published.
Manuscripts of articles accepted for publication are not returned to the author.
Manuscripts of articles not accepted for publication and the text of the motivated refusal are returned to the author.
The responsibility for copyright infringement and non-compliance with existing standards in the materials of the article rests with its author. The author and the reviewer are responsible for the accuracy of the facts and data, the validity of the conclusions and recommendations and the scientific and practical level of the article.

The reasons for declining of an article for publication make the next factors:

Plagiarism was found in the manuscript of the article.
The article does not correspond to the industry profile of the journal.
The article does not meet the requirements of standardized approaches to scientific articles established by the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine and international conventions.
The author does not take into account the comments and wishes of reviewers that arose during the review.
The editorial board, based on the expert assessment of two reviewers, decided to return the manuscript to the author without the right to resubmit it to the editor.