Review Policy

The editorial policy of the journal *Bulletin of the National Academy of Managerial Staff of Culture and Arts*, its publication ethics, and review procedures comply with international standards of academic ethics and adhere to the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics / COPE, ( http://www.publicationethics.org ).

The journal’s review policy is based on principles that ensure a high scientific quality of publications:

Objectivity: Communication between the author and the journal’s editorial office is conducted in an atmosphere of mutual respect. Manuscripts are evaluated without regard to the authors’ previous achievements, race, ethnicity, gender, religion, citizenship, sexual orientation, or political views;

Confidentiality: Manuscripts are the intellectual property of their authors and are not subject to disclosure. Reviewers are not permitted to publish, disclose, or use the materials of a manuscript submitted for review prior to its publication. Correspondence between the editorial office and authors or reviewers, as well as reviewers’ comments and recommendations, may not be published or disclosed in any form;

Independent review: All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo a *blind peer review* process. Reviewers do not know the authors’ names or their affiliations (places of employment), which helps minimize subjectivity and avoid conflicts of interest. In the event of any conflict of interest, a reviewer may decline the review, and the Editor-in-Chief / Deputy Editor-in-Chief will appoint another reviewer;

Competent review: Reviewers are members of the editorial board or external independent experts who are recognized specialists in the relevant field (holding an academic degree and having publications on the subject of the manuscript) and who have no conflicts of interest with the author (e.g., they do not work at the same institution, have no jointly published works, etc.). Participation in the review process is voluntary and takes place only with the reviewer’s consent and in the absence of conflicts of interest;

Editorial dialogue: If questions arise, the author has the right to contact the journal’s editorial office for clarification. Review results are communicated to the author by email. If the author disagrees with the reviewer’s comments or recommendations, they may submit a reasoned response to the editorial office. In such cases, the manuscript is considered at a meeting of the editorial board’s working group. The editorial office may send the manuscript for additional review by another specialist, with mandatory observance of the blind review principle;

Right to revision: The editorial office reserves the right to reject a manuscript if the author is unable or unwilling to address the reviewers’ comments. In such cases, the author receives an email stating the reason for rejection. After addressing the deficiencies, the author may resubmit the manuscript for review;

Compliance with copyright and related rights: Authors are responsible for any violations of third-party copyrights, for the accuracy of the facts presented, and for proper citation. By submitting a manuscript, the author guarantees that it: presents entirely original work; is not plagiarized; has not been published elsewhere in any language; provides references for all quotations and cited sources; and lists as co-authors all individuals who made a significant contribution to the research, who have approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication;

Ensuring academic integrity: Any individual may, at any time, notify the editorial office of suspected unethical behavior or other misconduct related to a published article. After consultation with the editorial board, the Editor-in-Chief decides whether to initiate a potential retraction process. All evidence is treated as strictly confidential and is disclosed only to those involved in the review process. The author has the right to respond to any allegations made. If misconduct is established, it may be classified as minor or serious. Minor violations resulting from misunderstanding are addressed directly with the involved parties (author/reviewer) without involving others, and the author/reviewer receives a warning letter. In cases of confirmed serious violations, the Editor-in-Chief, after consultation with the editorial board, decides on further actions, which may include: informing the author’s or reviewer’s employer by official letter of the misconduct; imposing a ban on manuscript submissions for a specified period; or formally retracting the publication from the journal.