Peer review procedure, publication ethics, and editorial policy of the journal

The peer review procedure, publication ethics, and editorial policy of the journal comply with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE, www.publicationethics.org). It is designed to ensure the most objective assessment of the content of a scientific article, to determine its compliance with the requirements of the scientific journal, and to provide a comprehensive analysis of its strengths and weaknesses.

All scientific articles submitted to the journal’s editorial office undergo a double-blind peer review process.

PEER REVIEW PROCEDURE

  1. The author shall submit an article to the editorial board of the journal, which must comply with the requirements for articles in the academic publication “Library Science. Record Studies. Informology” and the general guidelines for the preparation of academic works for publication. Papers that do not meet the accepted requirements are not accepted for further consideration, and their authors are notified of this by email.
  2. Original papers submitted to the editorial board are assessed by the editor-in-chief / deputy editor-in-chief for relevance to the journal’s subject matter, formal criteria, and, using the StrikePlagiarism system, determines the degree of originality of the author’s text (80% or higher); following a positive assessment, the editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief selects two reviewers from among the editorial board members whose academic work is relevant to the article’s subject area. If necessary, external experts with publications in the relevant subject areas may be involved in the review process.
  3. Article review is conducted anonymously: the reviewers analysing the article do not know the author’s name, and the author does not know the reviewers’ names. Communication between the author and the reviewers takes place via the executive secretary by email. The review process may take up to 30 days.
  4. Reviewers receive an anonymous copy of the article, which they assess according to the following criteria:
  • correspondence of the article’s title to its content;
  • sufficient disclosure of the article’s relevance;
  • comprehensiveness of the analysis of recent research and publications on the specified topic;
  • consistency between the article’s purpose and its title and the presentation of the main material;
  • logical justification of the scientific results obtained;
  • scientific novelty of the article, which indicates its contribution to the relevant scientific field;
  • consistency between the article’s conclusions and its purpose;
  • terminological clarity of the article;
  • correct formatting of the article’s illustrative material;
  • absence of a need for substantial scientific and literary editing of the article;
  • presence of references to cited sources;
  • formatting of the list of cited sources and References in accordance with the journal’s requirements.
  1. Reviewers prepare a report on the possibility of publishing the article with one of the following wording:
  • to publish without changes;
  • to publish provided that the article is revised by the author;
  • to reject the article in its entirety.
  1. The Executive Secretary sends the results of the peer review to the author by email. If the article requires revision, the author must return the revised version to the editorial office no later than 10 days after receipt. Submission of the article at a later date changes the date of its receipt by the editorial office and review.
  2. The revised version of the article is resubmitted to the reviewers for a decision on its suitability for publication. The date of acceptance of the article for publication is considered to be the date on which the editorial board receives positive conclusions from the reviewers regarding the appropriateness of publishing the article.
  3. Once a decision has been made to accept the article for publication, the Executive Secretary informs the author and indicates the expected publication date.
  4. Upon receipt by the editorial board of positive reviews from the reviewers on the feasibility of publishing the article and a favourable decision by the Editor-in-Chief / Deputy Editor-in-Chief based on this, the Executive Secretary includes it in the table of contents of the journal issue. The final table of contents of the journal issue is approved by the Academic Council of the National Academy of Culture and Arts Management.
  5. A paper approved for publication undergoes technical and literary editing. Minor stylistic or formal corrections that do not affect the content of the article may be made by the journal editor without the author’s consent.

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND EDITORIAL POLICY

In line with its editorial policy, the academic journal “Library Science. Record Studies. Informology” consistently adheres to the COPE Code of Conduct for publication, as approved by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Members of the editorial board and/or external independent experts review articles in accordance with the principle of objectivity and in line with international academic standards.

The editorial board retains the right to make stylistic edits to the paper. Any changes which, in the editorial board’s opinion, may alter the content of the text will be agreed with the author.

The editorial board of the journal retains the right to reject articles that do not meet the journal’s requirements or fall outside its scope.

The opinions and suggestions expressed in the articles do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial board. The authors are responsible for the accuracy of the information in the articles, the correctness of titles, statistical data, names, and quotations.

The editorial board retains the right to make minor editorial changes to the text and to abridge it, whilst preserving the author’s style.

Submitted articles will not be returned and may not be published in other scientific journals.

Editorial ethics principles

When deciding whether to publish a paper, the editorial board is guided by positive reviews from referees who are recognised experts in the relevant field (holding an academic degree and having published works on the subject of the article) and who have no conflict of interest with the author of the article.

The intellectual content of papers is evaluated regardless of the authors’ race, gender, religious beliefs, origin, nationality, social status or political views.

The editorial board does not publish a paper if there are grounds to believe that it constitutes plagiarism: the academic integrity score must be no less than 80%.

The editorial board does not leave complaints regarding submitted papers or published materials unanswered, and in the event of a conflict, takes all necessary measures to restore any infringed rights.

Reviewer ethics principles

A paper received for review is treated as a confidential document, which is the intellectual property of the authors and may not be passed on for perusal or discussion to third parties who do not have authorisation from the editorial board.

By submitting a manuscript for review, authors entrust reviewers with the results of their academic work and creative endeavours, upon which their reputation and career may depend. The disclosure of confidential information relating to the review of a paper violates the author’s rights. Confidentiality may only be breached in the event of a claim of inaccuracy or falsification of materials; in all other cases, it must be maintained.

The reviewer conducts a scientific assessment of the author’s work in order to objectively evaluate the quality of the submitted paper and determine its compliance with scientific, literary, and ethical standards. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.

The reviewer shall not consider a paper if there is a conflict of interest arising from competition, collaboration or other relationships with any authors or organisations associated with the paper.

Ethical principles for authors of scientific articles

The author(s) of the article guarantee(s) that the submitted paper:

  • presents reliable results of the research conducted;
  • is not plagiarised;
  • has not been previously published in any language;
  • contains references to the publications used in the article.