Publication ethics and editorial policy of the journal, which comply with COPE recommendations

The editorial policy of the journal ‘National Academy of Managerial Staff of Culture and Arts Herald’, its publication ethics and peer review procedure are in line with international standards of scientific ethics and comply with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE, www.publicationethics.org).

The journal’s peer review policy is based on principles that ensure the high academic quality of articles:

objectivity: communication between the author and the journal’s editorial board takes place in an atmosphere of mutual respect; manuscripts are evaluated without regard to the authors’ prior achievements, race, ethnic origin, gender, religion, nationality, sexual orientation, or political views;

confidentiality: manuscripts are the intellectual property of the authors and must not be disclosed. Reviewers are not permitted to publish an article submitted for review or to use material from the article prior to its publication. Correspondence between the editorial board and authors and reviewers, as well as reviewers’ comments and suggestions, may not be published or disclosed in any way;

independent peer review: all articles submitted to the journal undergo a double-blind peer review process: reviewers do not know the authors’ names or their affiliations (places of work), which helps to minimise subjectivity and avoid conflicts of interest. In the event of any conflict of interest, a reviewer may decline to review the manuscript – the Editor-in-Chief or Deputy Editor-in-Chief will appoint another reviewer;

competent expertise: reviewers are members of the editorial board or (if necessary) external independent experts who are recognised specialists in the relevant field (holding an academic degree and having publications on the article’s subject), and who have no conflict of interest with the author: they do not work at the same institution, have no jointly published works, etc. The involvement of reviewers in the review process is on a voluntary basis, solely with their consent and provided there is no conflict of interest;

editorial dialogue: should any questions arise, the author may contact the journal’s editorial board for resolution. The author receives the review results by email. Should the author disagree with the reviewer’s suggestions and comments, they have the right to submit a reasoned response to the journal’s editorial board. In such cases, the article is considered at a meeting of the editorial board’s working group. The editorial board may send the article for additional review to another expert, strictly adhering to the principle of ‘blind’ review;

Right to Revise: After peer review, the author may make changes to the article in accordance with the reviewers’ comments. If the author does not address the deficiencies or refuses to consider justified remarks, the editorial board has the right to reject the article, notifying the author by email and specifying the reasons for the refusal. After correcting the deficiencies, the author may resubmit the manuscript for review.

Compliance with Copyright and Related Rights: The authors of an article are responsible for any violations of others’ copyright, the accuracy of the facts presented, and the correctness of citations. By submitting a manuscript, the author guarantees that the submitted manuscript:

• describes entirely original work;
• is not plagiarized;
• has not been published elsewhere in any language;
• provides references for all cited works and mentioned sources;
• lists all individuals who made a significant contribution to the research as co-authors, who have approved the final version of the article and agreed to its submission for publication.

Ensuring Academic Integrity: Any individual may notify the editorial board at any time of suspected unethical behavior or other improper actions regarding a published article. The Editor-in-Chief, after consultation with the editorial board, decides whether to initiate the process of potential manuscript retraction. All evidence is treated as strictly confidential and is provided only to those involved in the review process. The author has the right to respond to any allegations.