Aim and Scope

"Science Almanac of Black Sea Region Countries " is an international open access scientific journal aimed at a wide professional audience which offers the Russian and foreign authors the information platform for the publication of the results of scientific researches in the field of Social and Political Philosophy, Philosophical Anthropology and Religious Studies paying special attention to cross-disciplinary researches covering study of topical issues of education, history and cultural theory of the Black Sea region.

Purposes: to highlight, preserve and disseminate the results of the latest scientific research in these areas of knowledge.

Objectives: integration of the main trends and achievements of modern scientific research, formation of an open scientific debate that improves the quality of scientific publications and the level of training of specialists, establishment and strengthening of scientific ties between scientists from different regions of Russia and other countries.

The journal admits to examination original scientific articles containing national and regional and interregional components; review articles, including the articles about the Russian and foreign schools of sciences and of outstanding scientists; reviews of books; the results of the international conferences containing debatable aspects of the considered problems

Target audience: researchers, teachers of universities, colleges and schools, students of universities in specialized areas.

Section Policies

Social and Political Philosophy

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Philosophical Anthropology, Philosophy of Culture

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Religious Studies

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Theory and History of Culture

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Scientific Life

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Heritage of the Past: Caucasus Study

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Publication Frequency

4 issues per year

(March 30, June 30, September 30, December 30) 

Open Access Policy

"Science Almanac of Black Sea Region Countries" is an open access journal (Gold OA). All articles are freely available to readers immediately upon publication. Our open access policy follows the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), which means that the articles we publish are available on the Internet. Any user is free to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, cite, scan, and index the articles, store them as data using various software, or use them for any other legal purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the Internet.

For more information, please read BOAI statement.

Peer-Review

1. In order to ensure the quality of published materials, all materials submitted to the editorial office (except for the section Heritage of the Past: Caucasus Studies) are subject to mandatory review for the purpose of their expert evaluation.
2. The manuscript may be rejected at the stage prior to peer review. The grounds for rejection before reviewing can be: inconsistency of the subject matter of the article with the journal's specialization, violation of the requirements for formatting and submitting the article to the editorial office by the author (authors), the presence of plagiarism, the obvious low scientific quality of the article, the previous (early carried out) publication of the article (or its fragments) in another edition; the use of technical techniques that allow to increase the assessment of the originality of the text in the Anti-Plagiarism system; violation of the norms of publication ethics by the author (authors). The author (authors) is notified of the reasons for the rejection of his article.
3. The journal carries out double blind peer review. With this type of review, the identity of the reviewer is unknown to the author, just as the identity of the author is unknown to the reviewer.
4. The review of the article is carried out by experts-specialists who are actively working in the scientific fields corresponding to the sections of the journal. Experts (including the authors of the journal) who have a scientific degree of candidate or doctor of science, who have the closest scientific specialization to the topic of the article and scientific publications on this topic created over the past 3 years, are involved in the review.
5. The term of reviewing is no more than 1 month from the moment the manuscript is received by the editorial office.
6. Accompanying documents for the article and original reviews are kept in the editorial office for 3 years. Copies of reviews are provided upon request to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.
7. The review analyzes the content of the article in terms of scientific novelty, originality, argumentation, persuasiveness, theoretical and practical significance of the presented text, as well as compliance with the requirements of the journal.
8. The reviewer gives recommendations on the possibility of article publication (each decision of the reviewer is justified).

According to the results of the review, the article can be:

a) rejected;

b) defined as in need to be improved with subsequent additional review;

c) accepted for publication without need for revision and additional review

9. In case of detection of plagiarism in the text, falsification of research results, the article is rejected without the right to further processing or revision.
10. In case of a negative decision of the reviewer, a reasoned refusal is sent to the author.
11. The relationship between the author of the article, the reviewer and the editorial board is determined by the norms of publication ethics.
12. The article modified by the author is sent for reconsideration to the reviewer who made critical comments.

13. In case of negative feedback on the revised version of the article, the Editorial Board can send the manuscript to another reviewer for a second review.

14. The decision to include an article in the journal or to reject it is taken by the Editorial Board based on the report of a member of the Editorial Board, taking into account the review.

15. If there are disagreements among the members of the Editorial Board on the issue of the article’s publication, the decision is made at the meeting of the Editorial Board by simple voting. In case of equal number of votes, the Chief Editor's vote is decisive.

16. The order and sequence of publication of the manuscript is determined depending on the volume of published materials and the list of sections / headings in each particular issue.

Publishing Ethics

Compliance of Publication Ethics applies to all members of the publishing process: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, Publisher, etc.

The Editorial Board relies on manuals prepared by specialized publishing organizations and is a member of the Association of Science Editors and Publishers (ASEP). The Bulletin follows the procedures develo­ped by the Committee on Publication Ethics (UK), Elsevier (Netherlands), and the Ethical Principles of Scientific Publications (AS­EP).

1. Duties of editors

1.1. Decision on the publication

The editor of the network edition "Science Almanac of Black Sea Region Countries" (further the journal) is responsible for making a decision on the publication of the presented material. Making a decision on the publication the editor is guided by the reliability of the provided data and the scientific importance of the presented work. The editor can be guided by the policy of editorial board of the journal, being limited by the operating legal norms concerning slander, the author's right and plagiarism. Making a decision on the publication the editor can consult with other editors and reviewers.

1.2. Impartiality

The editor has to estimate intellectual contents of manuscripts regardless of race, gender, religious views, origin, nationality or political preferences of authors.

1.3. Confidentiality

The editor and the editorial board of the journal are obliged not to disclose without the need the information about the accepted manuscript to anybody, except for authors, reviewers and other scientific consultants.

1.4. Conflicts of interests

The editor has no right without written consent of the author to use the unpublished materials which are contained in the submitted manuscript in the own researches. The confidential information or the ideas received during the review should not be disclosed by the editor and they should not be used for getting personal benefit.

The editor has to refuse consideration of manuscripts in case of the existence of the conflict of interests owing to the existence of the relations of the competition, co-operation or other interactions and relations with any of authors or other organizations connected with the presented work; in such cases he is obliged to transfer the manuscript for consideration and for reviewing to the other editor.

1.5. Actions in case of detection of a mistake in the published works

In case of detection of essential mistakes or inaccuracies in already published work the editor, if it is necessary, interacting with the publisher, is obliged to organize the fastest publication of correction, refutation or specification.

1.6. Participation in investigation of violations of ethics

In case of the ethical claims concerning the considered manuscripts or the published materials, the editors’ office together with the publisher takes the appropriate measures which generally include interaction with authors of the manuscript and the consideration of the corresponding complaint or requirement, and which can also include interaction with relevant organizations and research centers.

2. Duties of reviewers

2.1. Requirements to the manuscript and objectivity

The reviewer is obliged to give an objective assessment to the manuscript. The personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. The reviewer should offer the own opinion accurately and justifiably.

2.2. Sense of duty

The reviewer considering himself insufficiently experienced for the consideration of the manuscript or not having sufficient time for fast performance of this work, has to notify the editor of the journal and ask to exclude him from the process of review of the concrete manuscript.

2.3. Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review has to be considered as the confidential document. It is forbidden to transfer it to any persons which have not got the authority from the editor.

2.4. Recognition of sources

In the presence of the published works corresponding to the manuscript subject but not included in the bibliography, the reviewer is obliged to specify them. The reviewer has to accompany each statement that a certain observation, a conclusion or an argument was published earlier with the corresponding bibliographic reference. The reviewer has to draw the attention of the editor to the detection of essential similarity or coincidence between the considered manuscript and any other published work which is in the sphere of scientific competence of the reviewer.

2.5. Conflicts of interests

The reviewer should not participate in consideration of manuscripts in case of the existence of the conflict of interests owing to the existence of the relations of the competition, co-operation or other interactions and relations with any of authors or other organizations connected with the presented work.

The reviewer has no right without written consent of the author to use the unpublished materials which are contained in the submitted manuscript in the own researches. The confidential information or the ideas received during the review should not be disclosed by the reviewer and they should not be used for getting personal benefit.

3. Duties of authors

3.1. Requirements to manuscripts

The author of the article stating an original research has to report the reliable results of the done work and also objective discussion of the importance of the research. The data which are the cornerstone of the work should not contain mistakes. The work has to contain enough details and bibliographic references for possible reproduction. False or obviously wrong statements are regarded as unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

The reviews and articles expressing professional opinion also have to be exact and objective. Articles expressing editorial opinion have to be accurately identified per se.

3.2. Originality and plagiarism

The author has to guarantee that his work is completely original and that when using works or statements of other authors the corresponding bibliographic references or quotes are given.

Plagiarism can exist in many forms, from the representation of others work as author's and copying or rephrasing of essential parts of others works (without indication of authorship) to the statement of the own rights for the results of others researches. Plagiarism in all forms is unethical behavior and it is unacceptable.

3.3. Plurality, redundancy and simultaneity of publications

Generally, the author should not publish the manuscript presenting in essence one and the same research, more than in one scientific journal intended for the publication of original researches. Submission of one and the same manuscript at the same time more than to one journal is regarded as unethical behavior and it is unacceptable. The author also should not submit for consideration any article which was earlier published in other journal.

3.4. Recognition of sources

Authors have to refer to publications which significantly affected the nature of the presented work. Information obtained in a private order, for example in a conversation, from correspondence or in the course of discussion with the third parties, should not be used or stated without clearly expressed written permission of primary source. Information obtained during rendering confidential services should not be used without obvious written permission of authors of the work performed during rendering these confidential services.

3.5. Authorship of the publication

Only those persons who made a substantial contribution to the plan, development, carrying out or interpretation of the presented research can act as authors of the publication. All those who contributed significantly, have to be specified as coauthors. If there are persons which contributed significantly to a certain aspect of the research project, they have to be specified as such.

The author corresponding with the editors` office has to make sure that all participants who contributed significantly to the research are specified as coauthors and also that all coauthors got acquainted with a final version of work, approved it and agreed with its representation for the publication.

3.6. Disclosure of information and conflict of interests

All the authors are obliged to open in the manuscripts financial or other essential conflicts of interests which can be interpreted as the factors which had an impact on the results or conclusions presented in the work. All the sources of financial support of the research project have to be opened.

3.7. Essential mistakes in the published works

In case of detection of essential mistakes or inaccuracies in the publication the author has to report about it to the editor or to the publisher and to cooperate with them for the purpose of the fastest withdrawal of the publication or correction of mistakes. If the editor or the publisher received data from the third party that the publication contains essential mistakes, the author is obliged to withdraw the work or to correct mistakes as soon as possible.

4. Publisher's duties

4.1. The publisher has to follow the principles and procedures promoting performance of ethical standards by editors, reviewers and authors of the journal in compliance with publication ethics. The publisher guarantees that potential profit on advertising or production of reprints does not influence the editors` decisions.

4.2. The publisher is obliged to give support to the editors of the journal in consideration of the claims which arose concerning ethical questions and to help to interact with other journals and/or publishers if it promotes appropriate execution by the editors of the duties.

4.3. The publisher is obliged to follow the code of the best practice and to implement the industry standards as for observance of ethical standards, the order of correction of violations and withdrawal of publications.

4.4. If it is necessary, the publisher has to provide specialized legal support in a form of consultation and preparation of the legal conclusions.

Founder

• Federal state budget education establishment of high professional education “Don State Technical University” (DSTU)

Fee for the publication

The editorial board does not charge authors.
Journal does not accept advertising materials for publication.

Sources of income

The publication of the journal is financed by the funds of the parent organization.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interests

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the written consent of the author.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Plagiarism detection

When reviewing an article, the editorial board of the journal checks the material using Антиплагиат and Crossref Similarity Check systems. If multiple borrowings are found, the editorial board acts in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the journal's publication ethics.

Preprint and Postprint Policy

In the process of submitting an article to the Editorial Board, the author must confirm that these materials have not been published or have not been accepted for publication in another scientific journal. When linking to a published manuscript in the online publication "Science Almanac of Black Sea Region Countries," 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 that are not related to other publishers are allowed for consideration.

Complaint Policy

Complaints shall be sent to the Editor-in-Chief and reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief, who can transfer them to an editor or a specialist who worked with the paper for finding the solution to a complaint.
An appeal against the decision to reject an article based on its scientific value. The Editor-in-Chief shall consider the arguments of the authors stated in the complaint and send the materials to reviewers for consideration. The reviewers shall make decisions using the following options: “The rejection decision must remain in effect”; “Another independent opinion is required”; "The appeal should be satisfied." The applicant shall be informed about the corresponding decision. The appeal decision shall be final.
Complaint against the implementation of certain procedures. The Editor-in-Chief shall consider a substance of the complaint and based on the investigation make managerial decision which shall be communicated to all interested parties in writing or by e-mail.
Complaint concerning publishing ethics. When handling complaints concerning publication ethics, Editor-in-Chief shall be guided by the principles presented in the Publication Ethics and Editorial Policies developed based on the standard of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) "Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing". In difficult cases, the Editor-in-Chief can introduce a question for the discussion at the Editorial Board of the journal. The decision on the complaint shall be taken collectively and documented.

Retraction Policy

This section is prepared on the basis of the Rules for Paper Retraction (revoking a publication) of the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (ASEP) and describes the procedure for retracting a paper if violations are found in the published materials.
Grounds for revoking the article:
    • detection of plagiarism in a paper;
    • duplication of a paper in several publications;
    • detection of falsifications or fabrications (for example, manipulation of experimental data) in a paper;
    • detection of serious errors in a paper (for example, misinterpretation of the findings), which casts doubt on its scientific value;
    • incorrect composition of authors’ team (a person who deserves to be an author is not included; persons who do not meet the authorship criteria are included);
    • concealment of conflict of interest (and other violations of publication ethics);
    • republishing a paper without the author’s consent.
A paper retraction shall be performed at the official request of the author(s) of the article and/or the Editorial Board with the reasoned explanation of their decision, as well as by the decision of the journal Editorial Board on the basis of internal expert review.
The author(s) must be informed of the decision to retract the paper, including the retraction justification.
The paper and description of the paper shall remain available on the journal's website as part of the corresponding issue of the journal, but the inscription RETRACTED and the retraction date shall be applied to the electronic version of the text; the same notice is placed with the paper title in the table of contents of the issue. 
Information about the retracted papers shall be transmitted to the ASEP Scientific Publications Ethics Board (to enter the information into the unified database of retracted papers) and to the Sience Electronic Library (elibrary.ru) (information about the paper and the full text shall remain available on elibrary.ru, but shall be supplemented with the retraction notice. The retracted papers and references from them shall be excluded from the RISC and shall not participate in the calculation of indicators).

Journal policy on data sharing and reproducibility

Providing Authors with access to the research data generated by the study that substantiates the content of their publications is encouraged but not mandatory. Authors' consent to provide access to research data does not influence the decision to publish.

Intellectual property

The Editorial Board respects the intellectual property rights of the Authors and does not allow the transfer of copyrighted materials to third parties, other than reviewers and editorial staff, without the consent of the author.

Archive

To ensure the long-term digital storage of the materials published in the journal “Science Almanac of Black Sea Region Countries”, they are reposited in:
    • Scientific Electronic Library (eLIBRARY)
    • Russian State Library (RSL)
    • Internet Archive
    • National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)