Policies | Vestnik of Polotsk State University. Part A. Humanities

This journal provides immediate open access to its content based on the following principle: free open access to research results enhances the global exchange of knowledge.

Archiving

Peer-Review

All the scientific articles, submitted to the editorial group of the journal “Vestnik of Polotsk State University (Part A)”, undergo a mandatory double-blind review (the reviewer does not know the authors of the manuscript, the authors of the manuscript do not know the reviewers). Manuscripts are sent to reviewer for evaluation.

1. Articles are reviewed by members of the editorial council as well as by invited reviewers - leading experts in the field of history and archeology, ethnography, literature and linguistics of Belarus and other countries. The decision to choose a reviewer for evaluation of an article is made by the chairman of the editorial council. The period of reviewing is 2 weeks, but it can be extended at the request of the reviewer.

2. Each reviewer has the right to refuse a review if there is a clear conflict of interests affecting the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials. After reviewing the manuscript, the reviewer makes recommendations about the after-life of the article (each reviewer's decision is substantiated):

the article is recommended for publication in its present form;
the article is recommended for publication after the reviewer’s corrections;
the article is not recommended for publication.

3. If the review contains recommendations to correct and improve the article, the editorial staff sends the text of the review to the author with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them with arguments (partially or completely). A follow-up revision of the article should not take more than 2 weeks from the moment of sending an e-mail to the authors about the need to make changes. If necessary, the article revised by the author is sent for reviewing again.

4. If the authors refuse to revise the materials, they must notify the editorial council in writing or verbally about their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version after 3 weeks from the date of sending the review, even in the absence of information from the authors with the refusal to revise the article, the editorial staff removes it from the registration. In such situations, the authors are sent a corresponding notice of deregistration of the manuscript in connection with the expiration of the deadline for revision.

5. If the author and reviewers have unresolvable conflicts regarding the manuscript, the editorial council has the right to send the manuscript for additional reviewing. In conflicting situations, the decision is made by the chairman of the editorial council at the meeting of the editorial council.

6. The decision to refuse to publish a manuscript is made at the meeting of the editorial council in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. The article, not recommended by the decision of the editorial council for publication, will not be accepted for reconsideration. A notification of refusal of publication is sent to the author by e-mail.

7. After the editorial council makes a decision on the admission of the article for publication, the editorial staff informs the author about it and specifies the date of publication.

8. A positive review is not a sufficient basis for publication of an article. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial council. In conflicting situations, the decision is made by the chairman of the editorial council.

9. The original reviews are kept in the journal's editorial office for 5 years.

Publishing Ethics

Inroduction
1.1. Publication in peer-reviewed journals is not only a simple way of scientific communication, but it also makes a significant contribution to the development of the relevant field of scientific knowledge. Thus, it is important to set standards for the future ethical conduct of all parties involved in the publication, namely: Authors, Journal Editors, Reviewers, Publisher and Scientific Society for the journal "Vestnik of Polotsk State University, Part A"
1.2. The publisher not only supports scientific communications and invests in the process, but is also responsible for ensuring that all current recommendations in the published work are followed.
1.3. The publisher is committed to the strictest oversight of scientific materials. Our journal programs represent an unbiased "report" of the development of scientific thought and research, so we are also aware of our responsibility to properly present these "reports," especially in terms of the ethical aspects of the publications outlined in this document.

2. The Editors’ Responsibilities
2.1. Decision for publication The chairman of the editorial council of the scientific journal "Vestnik of Polotsk State University, Part A" is responsible for making the decision for publication in cooperation with the editorial council. The credibility of the reviewed work and its scientific significance should always be the basis of the decision for publication. The chairman of the editorial council is guided by the Statute of the journal "Vestnik of Polotsk State University".
2.2. Integrity
The chairman of the editorial council should evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, citizenship, or political preferences of the Authors.
2.3. Privacy
The editorial staff and editorial council of "Vestnik of Polotsk State University, Part A" ensure privacy of the information, considered for publication.
2.4. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interests
2.4.1 Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for review must not be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained in the course of reviewing and related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for self .
2.4.2 The chairman of the editorial council should recuse himself or herself from the reviewing of manuscripts (namely: requesting the Vice-Chair of the editorial council, cooperating with other members of the editorial council in the reviewing of the work instead of making a personal decision) in case of conflicts of interests due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with Authors, companies and possibly other organizations related to the manuscript.
2.5. Supervision of publications
The editorial staff or editorial council of the journal that has provided credible evidence that the assertions or conclusions presented in the publication are erroneous, must inform the Publisher on it for the purpose of prompt notification of changes, withdrawal of the publication, expression of concern and other statements appropriate to the situation.
2.6. Involvement and collaboration within research
The editorial staff together with the editorial council of the journal take adequate response measures in case of ethical claims concerning the reviewed manuscripts or published materials. Such measures generally include interacting with the Authors of the manuscript and reasoning of the relevant complaint or claim but may also involve interaction with relevant organizations and research centers.

3. The Reviewers’ Responsibilities
3.1. What influences on the decision of the editorial council?
Reviewing helps the chairman of the editorial council make the decision for publication and, through appropriate interaction with the Authors, can also help the Author to improve the quality of the work. Reviewing is an essential link in formal scientific communication and is the basis of the scientific approach.
3.2. Efficiency
Any selected Reviewer who feels insufficiently qualified to review the manuscript or who does not have enough time to complete the work quickly should notify the editorial council of the journal "Vestnik of Polotsk State University, Part A" and ask to be excluded from the reviewing process of the corresponding manuscript.
3.3. Privacy
Any manuscript, received for reviewing, must be considered as a private document. This work should not be revealed to and discussed with any unauthorized persons.
3.4. Requirements to the manuscript and impartiality
The reviewer must give an impartial assessment. Personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their opinion clearly and reasonably.
3.5. Recognition of primary sources
Reviewers should identify significant published works relevant to the topic and not included in the references of the manuscript. Any statement (observation, conclusion, or argument) previously published should be referenced in the manuscript. The Reviewer should also draw the attention of the editorial council to tracing significant similarities or overlaps between the reviewed manuscript and any other published work within the reviewer's scientific competence.
3.6. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interests
3.6.1 Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for review must not be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained in the course of reviewing and related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
3.6.2 Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts if there are conflicts of interests due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations related to the submitted work.

4. The authors’ Responsibilities
4.1. Requirements to manuscripts
4.1.1 Authors of the original research report should provide reliable results of the work done as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the research. The data underlying the work should be presented without errors. The work should contain sufficient details and bibliographic references for possible reproduction. False or deliberately false statements are perceived as unethical conduct and are unacceptable.
4.1.2. Reviews and scientific articles should also be accurate and objective, and the point of view of the Editorial council should be clearly stated.
4.2. Authenticity and plagiarism
4.2.1 Authors must ensure that completely authentic work is submitted and, if using the work or statements of other Authors, must provide appropriate references or excerpts.
4.2.2 Plagiarism can exist in many forms, from presenting someone else's work as one's own, to copying or paraphrasing essential parts of someone else's work (without attribution), to claiming one’s own rights for the results of someone else's research. All forms of plagiarism are unethical and unacceptable.
4.3. Multiplicity, redundancy and simultaneity of publications
4.3.1 In general, an Author should not publish a manuscript, mostly dealing with the same research, in more than one journal as an original publication. Submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is perceived as unethical behavior and unacceptable.
4.3.2. In general, an Author should not submit a previously published article to another journal for consideration.
4.4. Recognition of primary sources
The contributions of others should always be acknowledged. Authors should refer to publications that are relevant to the execution of the submitted work. Data obtained privately, such as through conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, should not be used or presented without explicit written permission from the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources, such as manuscript evaluations or grants, should not be used without explicit written permission from the Authors of the work relating to confidential sources.
4.5. Authorship of the publication
4.5.1 Only persons who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the submitted research can be authors of a publication. All those who have made significant contributions should be designated as Co-authors. In cases where research participants have made significant contributions in a particular area of the research project, they should be identified as significant contributors to the research.
4.5.2. The Author should ensure that all participants who contributed substantially to the research are represented as Co-authors and that those who did not participate in the research are not listed as Co-authors, that all Contributors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agree to submit it for publication.
4.6. Significant errors in published works
If the Author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the publication, he/she should inform the editorial staff of the journal "Vestnik of Polotsk State University, Part A" and interact with the Editor in order to withdraw the publication or correct errors as soon as possible. If the editorial staff has received information from a third party that the publication contains significant errors, the Author is obliged to withdraw the work or correct errors as soon as possible.

Founder

Euphrosyne Polotskaya State University of Polotsk

Publication fee

The publication in the journal for authors is free of charge.

The editorial staff do not charge authors for preparing, posting and printing materials.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for review must not be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author.

Information or ideas obtained in the course of reviewing and related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts if there are conflicts of interests due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations related to the submitted work.

Borrowings and plagiarism

The editorial staff of the journal "Vestnik of Polotsk State University, Part A" when reviewing the articles makes a mandatory check of materials with the help of Anti-plagiarism system. The report on the originality of the text is considered at the meeting of the editorial council. In case of multiple borrowings the editorial staff acts in accordance with the rules of COPE.

Preprint and postprint Policy

In the process of submitting the article, the author needs to confirm that the article has not been published or has not been accepted for publication in another scientific journal. When referring to an article published in the journal "Vestnik of Polotsk State University, Part A" the publisher asks to place a link (full URL of the material) to the official website of the journal.

Articles previously posted by authors on personal or public sites other than those of another publishers are accepted for consideration.