Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal publishes new data of geophysical sciences and practice, theoretical developments, scientific  generalizations, results from studies in geophysical complexes, phenomena and deposits of mineral resources, methodological and instrumental developments, comprehensive study of the deep structure of the lithosphere, modern geodynamics and earthquake prediction, discussion problems, new concepts, hypotheses etc. There are such sections: geophysics, geophysical methods of exploration and prospecting of mineral deposits, the theoretical aspects of the geophysical sciences, tectonics, oil, gas, geological problems etc.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Scientific Reports

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Discussions

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Conferences

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Review article

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Personalia

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

In memory of a scientist

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

News

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Article retraction

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Miscellanea

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Recension

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

General regulations

Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal follows a double-blinded process of peer review. The manuscript is reviewed anonymously by two leading specialists in the corresponding field of biochemistry. Authors may suggest candidatures of independent reviewers for their work (the Editorial Board regards such wishes with understanding, though reserves the right to assign reviewers capable for the most qualified analysis of the work).

Our reviewers are aware that submitted manuscripts are the authors’ private property and are not the subject to unauthorized disclosure.

A reviewer’s decision is not final. Authors have a right to appeal against a reviewer’s decision.  In this case the paper will be sent to the independent referee or to adjudicating member of the Editorial Board for assessment.  A final decision on the appeal remains with the Editorial Board.

The Editor makes the decision on the paper, and informs the authors on the decision.

Once reviewer reports have been received, authors are given 3 weeks to revise the paper. The revised paper along with a point-by-point response to the reviewer reports and with the explanations on any changes made in the paper should be returned to the Editorial Office within 3 weeks.

The revised paper, approved and signed by reviewers and Scientific Editor, is considered as the final version. Any changes in the text, figures or tables are not permitted thereafter.

 Reviewing procedure

Submitted manuscript is registered by Editorial Staff at the time of receipt of a hard copy by mail or electronic version by e-mail.

Scientific Editors make a decision as to who will be assigned to review a manuscript, following a field of research.

A manuscript is send to the assigned reviewers.

Once reviewer reports have been received, the Editorial Staff send these reports to the authors. If two positive reports are obtained, the paper is accepted for publication. If revision is required, the authors revise the paper, considering all reviewers’ observations and recommendations.

The revised version of the paper then enters a second round of peer review.

If positive reviewers’ assessments are reported, the paper then is approved by the Scientific Editor and afterwards is considered and approved by the Editorial Board.

Manuscript approved by the Editorial Board is sent to the Editorial Office to be made ready for publication.

 

Open Access Policy

Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal is practicing a policy of immediate open access to published content, supporting the principles of the free flow of scientific information and global knowledge sharing for the general social progress.

 

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

RESPONSIBILITIES OF EDITORIAL BOARD AND EDITORS

Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal in its work endorses policy of Elsevier publishing house (Publishing Ethics) aimed at providing the highest standards of publishing ethics and follows the guidelines on ethics of research publication (Committee on Publication Ethics — COPE; http://publicationethics.org). Adherence to the regulations on publication ethics by all of involved in publication process provides protection of authors’ intellectual property right, credibility of a journal in the eyes of international scientific community and excludes the possibility of illegal use of author’s materials for benefits of particular persons. The reviewing and publication processes of the Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal follow the recommendations developed by Elsevier publishing house.

 Publication decision

Publication decision is always based on the study’s validity and importance to readers and researchers. The Editor-in-Chief should not be involved in the decision about paper, in which he/she has a conflict of interest. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for final decision which articles submitted to the journal shall be published. At that the Editor-in-Chief is guided by the journal policy and legal requirements for preventing libel, plagiarism and copyright infringement.  In making final decision Editor-in-Chief can consult with members of the Editorial Board or reviewers.

Fair play

The Editor-in-Chief assesses submitted manuscript on academic merit solely, regardless of authors’ ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, nationality or political views.

Confidentiality

The Editor-in-Chief, the Editorial Board members and Editorial staff are responsible for not disclosing of any information about the submitted manuscript to anyone except authors, referees, editorial board adviser and publisher.

Disclosure and Conflict of interests

Unpublished data from submitted manuscripts must not be used by the Editor-in-Chief, the Editorial Board members or Editorial staff for personal advantage or be transferred to third parties (without written consent of the authors).

The Editor-in-Chief should not allow to publish the materials if there is every reason to believe that it is plagiarism. Accepted papers are published under Open Access route, authors’ copyrights are reserved.

"Public trust in the peer review process and the credibility of published articles depend in part on how well conflict of interest is handled during writing, peer review, and editorial decision making. Conflict of interest exists when an author (or the author’s institution), reviewer, or editor has financial or personal relationships that inappropriately influence (bias) his or her actions (such relationships are also known as dual commitments, competing interests, or competing loyalties). These relationships vary from those with negligible potential to those with great potential to influence judgment, and not all relationships represent true conflict of interest. The potential for conflict of interest can exist whether or not an individual believes that the relationship affects his or her scientific judgment. Financial relationships (such as employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony) are the most easily identifiable conflicts of interest and the most likely to undermine the credibility of the journal, the authors, and of science itself. However, conflicts can occur for other reasons, such as personal relationships, academic competition, and intellectual passion.”

Dealing with complaints

The Editor-in-Chief along with the publisher should not remain the claim relating to submitted or published manuscripts unanswered.  If there is a disagreement, they will make all reasonable efforts to restore the violated rights and if errors are detected, to publish correction or refutation. Each case of declared publication misconduct will be thoroughly investigated (even if it has been detected years after publication).

RESPONSIBILITIES OF REVIEWERS

Contribution to Editorial Decision

Peer-review process assists the Editor-in-Chief in making final decision and through editorial communication with author also contributes to improvement of the paper. Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal endorses the Elsevier believes that all researches, who are striving to publish their own papers, have a moral duty to contribute to peer review process (http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/intro.cws_home/publishing).

Promptness

Any referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor-in-Chief and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

The content of a submitted manuscript and all aspects of its review should be kept strictly confidential and are not allowed to be shown to or discussed with anyone other than persons authorized by the Editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted fairly and unbiased, observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant reference. A reviewer should also notify the Editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the reviewed manuscript and any other published article of which they have personal knowledge.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORS

Authors should be aware that they have a personal responsibility for the content of the submitted manuscript.

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed, reliable results, as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient details and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are considered as unethical behavior and unacceptable.

Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study for editorial expertise and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. These data should be retained for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors should ensure that they submit only entirely original works. If they have used the work and/or statements of others, this must be appropriately cited or referenced. Plagiarism in any forms, including quotations or paraphrasing of substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), “passing off” another’s paper as the author’s own or claiming results from research conducted by others, constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.  Articles that are a compilation of published previously materials of other authors (without their own creative and authoring interpretation) are not accepted for publication.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication/submission

Usually authors should not publish in more than one primary publication materials describing essentially the same research. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and unacceptable.

Authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. It is sometimes justifiable the publication of some kinds of articles (such as translations) in more than one journal provided that certain conditions are met: the authors and editors of the journal must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Authors must properly acknowledge the contribution of all persons who relevant to the research or determining the nature of the reported work. Publications that have been influential in the course of research must be properly referenced in the paper. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.  Information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, should not be used without the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.

Authorship

Only persons who have made substantive intellectual contributions to the conception, design, execution, or analysis of the study should be listed as authors. All co-authors who have made significant contributions to execution, data acquisition or interpretation of the work should be included in the author list. Other participants, who provide technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support, should be acknowledged in the “Acknowledgments” section. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons named in the paper as authors are responsible for content of the work. If the article is a multi-disciplinary work, co-author may be responsible for his/her personal contribution, reserving a collective responsibility for the general result. Person who has not participated in research must not be listed as an author.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interests

Authors should disclose in the manuscript all research funding, any conflicts of interest that may influence the results, their interpretation or reviewers’ opinion. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include: employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria payment, paid expert testimony, patent arrangements, educational grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed as soon as possible.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their submitted or published work, they must promptly notify the journal’s editor and cooperate with them either to nullify or to correct the paper as soon as possible. If the Editorial Board learns from a third party that a published work contains significant errors, the authors must promptly correct the paper or provide evidence to the journal editor of the correctness of the paper.

Plagiarism detection

Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal takes responsibility to assist a scientific community in all aspects of publication ethics policy, particularly in case of multiple submission/publication and plagiarism.

 

Publication Frequence

The journal is published bimonthly.

Planning out the journal include:

submitting articles for publication in the next issue - before the 20th of every odd month, the publication of the article - before the 30th of the next (even) month.

Thus, the release of the numbers by months: February, April, June, August, October, December