Editorial Policy
I. ETHICAL PRINCIPLES
In its publication ethics the History of Philosophy Yearbook (HPY) follows the Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Compliance with these standards is mandatory for all parties involved in the publication process.
1. Editorial Team Responsibilities
1.1 Fair Play
All submitted manuscripts are evaluated by the quality of their content with no regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnicity, citizenship, political views and other personal characteristics of their authors.
1.2 Confidentiality
All received manuscripts are treated as documents that contain confidential information. Access to this information is given only to those who are involved in its assessment and preparation for publication. The Editoral Team guarantees that the process of reviewing is anonymous.
1.3. Conflict of Interests
Unpublished materials in the submitted manuscript may not be used by the members of the Editorial Team who have access to the content of the manuscripts for their own personal purposes (such as their own research) without explicit written consent of the author(s).
1.4 Peer Reviewers
The members of the Editorial Team select two qualified peer reviewers for each recieved and registered (i.e. those meeting formal requirements for design, subject matter, volume, etc.) manuscript. Peer reviewers may be chosen from among the members of the Editorial Board, the Advisory Board or they may be external, guest reviewers.
1.5 Publication Decisions
The final decision on accepting manuscripts recommended by peer reviewers for publication is made by the Editorial Team and the Editor-in-Chief. It is based on an objective assessment of the manuscript (its academic value, relevance and quality of exposition) and the principles of the HPY editorial policy.
2. Peer Reviewers’ Responsibilities
2.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions
The manuscript review procedure is designed to assist the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Team in deciding accepting the manuscript for publication and to help improve the texts submitted by authors.
2.2 Promptness
In most cases, authors will be notified of the acceptance of their articles for review within three weeks of submitting a manuscript to the HPY. The article review procedure takes up to four months from the moment the manuscript is submitted.
2.3 Confidentiality
The review process is anonymous, both for authors and peer reviewers.
2.4 Objectivity Standards
Peer reviewers must be as objective as possible. Personal criticism of the author is not allowed. Peer reviewers have to express their position clearly and support it with reasonable arguments.
If the invited peer reviewer feels that he/she does not have sufficient expertise to review the research reported in the manuscript or cannot prepare the review in time, he/she should notify the Editorial Team as soon as possible.
2.5 Conflict of Interest
Peer reviewers must reject proposals for reviewing manuscripts that trun out to create a conflict of interest with their own research work (for reasons of competition, collaboration, or any other relationship between them and the authors or institutions associated with the relevant manuscript).
2.6 Acknowledgement of Sources
Any previously published statement, observation or argument mentioned in the manuscript must be accompanied by an appropriate reference to the source. The peer reviewer must inform the Editorial Team about any significant similarities or overlaps in the content of the reviewed manuscript and any relevant previously published information that he/she is aware of.
3. Authors’ Responsibilities
3.1 Reporting Standards
Authors are responsible for the reasonableness and integrity of their research and should strive to present all available research results, including those that are not compatible with their hypothesis.
Knowingly false or inaccurate statements are not allowed.
It is the responsibility of the author to ensure the accuracy of the citation, the correctness of the bibliographic descriptions, and the transcription of names and titles.
3.2 Originality and Plagiarism
Authors must follow standards of academic integrity and avoid plagiarism, improper borrowing, falsification of data, manipulation, etc. Authors should correctly refer to all sources they use in their work, and refrain from indirectly quoting sources with which they are not familiar.
Forms of plagiarism include, inter alia:
— the use (verbatim quotation) of any amount of any material without identifying the source;
— the use of tables, graphs, charts and any other form of graphical representation of information without identifying the source;
— the use of tables, graphs, charts and any other forms of graphical representation of information published in scientific and popular publications without consent of the copyright holder;
— the use without written permission of materials whose authors or copyright holders prohibit their use without special approval.
Forms of improper borrowing include, inter alia:
— the lack of graphic highlighting of verbatim quoted text when the source is quoted;
— incorrect references (incomplete bibliographic descriptions of sources, preventing their identification);
— the reference not to the original source of the text quoted without an explicit note of this fact (an error in the identification of the original source);
— excessive citation (including that of one's own work), the amount of which is not justified by the type and purpose of the article.
Academic translations of texts that may be subject to copyright law are printed only if translators had obtained rights to publish it and with the permission of the copyright holders. Authors of submitted translations must themsevles reach an agreement with the copyright holders on the transfer of translation rights.
3.3 Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publications
By submitting a manuscript to HPY, the authors state that the manuscript is written by them personally, contains original research findings that have not been previously published and is not simultaneously considered for publication elsewhere.
Authors should not submit manuscripts describing essentially the same results to more than one journal as a primary publication. Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to several journals is considered unethical and will be ground for rejecting the submitted manuscript.
3.4 Information on Financing
Authors are responsible for identifying the sources of financial support for the project, the results of which are presented in the article, as well as for identifying the persons who have contributed to the research (including co-authors).
3.5 Authorship of the Manuscript
The list of authors of the manuscript should include the names of only those researchers who have made a significant contribution to the preparation and conduct of the research referred to in the manuscript. The list of authors should not mention the names of people who were not related to the work presented in the manuscript. All authors mentioned must agree to their name being included in the list of authors.
3.6 Significant Errors in Published Works
Should significant errors or inaccuracies in a published work be discovered, the author must notify the Editorial Team and facilitate the withdrawal of the published material or the publication of a notice of error.
II. PEER REVIEW POLICY
1. All research paper manuscripts submitted for publication in HPY undergo double blind peer review and an approval procedure by the Editorial Team. The materials in the 'Interviews' and 'Reviews' sections of the journal are usually ordered and accepted/rejected upon submission by the HPY Editorial Team and are not peer reviewed. The review process for the materials in the 'Translations' sections of the journal may be different from the one described below.
2. Upon submission, manuscript is checked by the Editorial Team to confirm that it conforms to the submission requirements (such as subject matter of the journal and the requirements for the design of manuscripts). If it does not, it may be rejected and the author will be notified accordingly.
3. All manuscripts are subjected to the check for improper borrowings and plagiarism. If the submitted manuscript is found to containt improper borrowing or plagiarism or to have been previously published elsewhere, it will be rejected and the author will be notified accordingly.
4. A research paper manuscript that pass the screening is sent for blind review to two peer reviewers within three weeks of submission. The review is carried out by the peer reviewers on a voluntary basis and free of charge. The review process may not exceed one month from the date of receiving the manuscript. Reviewers can decline within one week from the date of receiving the manuscript and must notify the Editorial Team of their decision.
5. Review process is anonymous for both the author and the reviewers.
6. Review process is confidential. Peer reviewers and members of the Editorial Board must keep all reviewed material confidential. Peer reviewers and members of the Editorial Board must not share materials sent in for peer review with third parties.
7. All reviewers have expertise in the subject matter of the peer-reviewed material and have publications on the subject of the peer-reviewed manuscript. Reviewers may be selected from among the members of the Editorial Board and among experts from various research and higher education institutions in Russia and other countries. In case the article is of an interdisciplinary nature, experts from appropriate fields may be may be invited to take part in the review process.
8. The author or any of the co-authors may not be invited as reviers of their own manuscript. Nor may scientific supervisors of applicants for an academic degree and researchers with whom the author is carrying out academic work within the framework of a grant that is funding the project under which the proposed manuscript was written for publication. Invited reviewers must notify the Editorial Team of any potential conflict of interest.
9. The review should include an expert analysis of the manuscript material, its objective reasoned assessment and constructive recommendations. The review should be concluded with the final decision concerning the suitability of the manuscript for publication: "recommended for publication"; "recommended for publication with revisions"; "not recommended for publication".
10. In case of positive assessment from both reviewers the manuscript has to be further approved by the Editorial Team. Upon acceptance the author will be notified by email, which may include a list of suggested revisions. The Editorial Team reserves the right to reject the manuscript even if both reviewers gave a positive assessment. In that case the author will be fully informed of the reasons for rejection.
11. In the case of negative assessments from both reviewers, the manuscript will be rejected and the author will be provided with the reasons for rejection. In the case of two conflicting reviews, the final decision concerning the manuscript will be made by the Editorial Team or directly by the Editor-in-Chief. In case of disagreement between the reviewers, the article may be sent to a third independent reviwer. These additional peer reviewers are also selected by the Editorial Team or the Editor-in-Chief.
12. At the request of the author, the HPY Editorial Team will send the author anonymous copies of the review of the article he/she has submitted.
13. Reviews are kept for a period of 5 years.
14. The Editorial Team agrees to submit copies of the reviews to the Department of Education and Science of Russian Federation upon request.
III. POLICIES PROVIDING FOR RETRACTION OF ARTICLES FROM PUBLICATION
1. In some cases, the HPY Editorial Team may decide to retract an article.
2. An article will be formally retracted if, at any stage of review, pre-publication or after publication, the Editorial Team or readers identify a breach of publication ethics. Retraction of an article due to a breach of publication ethics will also result in a ban on future publication of articles in HPY for all members of the author's team involved in the incident.
3. Reasons for article retraction:
— plagiarism in the article, including borrowed graphs, tables, charts, etc., if the fact of plagiarism has become apparent after the article has been published (see plagiarism policy);
— legitimate claims of copyright breach concerning the article or its individual parts by third parties;
— publication of the artcile elsewhere before it appeared in HPY;
— grave errors in the published article which call into question its research value.
4. In such circumstances, the HPY Editorial Board initiates a review, following which the article may be retracted. An article retraction report is drawn up and signed by the Editor-in-Chief. A copy of the report will be sent to the author of the article.
5. The article is not physically removed from the published circulation and the file of the issue on the website. The Editorial Team publishes a statement retracting the article and places it on the webpage with the Contents of the issue the article was publised in on the official HPY website.
IV. OPEN ACESS STATEMENT
1. HPY provides immediate open access to its published content.
2. Publised content of HPY is freely available without charge to any user on our website. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author as long as that use falls under the conditions of Creative Commons Worldwide BY-NC lincense.
3. HPY operates unders the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial 4.0 International Licence BY-NC. This allows others copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, as well as remix, tweak, and build upon the work, as long as it is not for commercial purposes and they credit the authors for the original creation, mention the first publication, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. All authors publishing in HPY accept these as the terms of publication.
4. To comply with legal requirements, we offer our authors to secure the Author's Agreement (Public offer) with our Publishing House on publication of an article in the journal. The sample agreement is available in the section "The Author’s Rights/ Copyright".
