Editorial Policies

Aims and Scope

Journal «Vestnik Samarskogo universiteta. Estestvennonauchnaya seriya / Vestnik of Samara University. Natural Science Series» is a scientific publication, which publishes the results of original research, including materials of scientific dissertation.

Business model: the journal is funded by the founder, all articles are published free of charge.

Remit of the Journal:

  • Mathematics and mechanics
  • Computer science and informatics
  • Physical sciences
  • Physical chemistry
  • Medical chemistry
  • Radiobiology
  • Biophysics
  • Mathematical biology, bioinformatics

Authors of the journal are both leading scientists of Russia and foreign countries, and beginning researchers (professors, graduate students).

 
 

Peer Review Process

Submitting, peer review, adoption, refusal and publishing of articles

  1. The journal ’Vestnik Samarskogo universiteta. Estestvennonauchnaya seriya / Vestnik of Samara University. Natural Science Series’ publishes only articles successfully passed true evaluation process. All the research and review manuscripts submitted for publication in the journal are object for obligatory evaluation procedure based on single-blind peer-review. The evaluation procedure includes the following steps.

    1. General evaluation of the manuscripts

    1.1. Within 10 working days from receipt of the manuscript its initial assessment for compliance with the topic and requirements of the Journal is performed by an Executive editor.

    1.2. Executive Editor of the journal is responsible for acceptance and preliminary evaluation of a submitted manuscript. He/she determines if the manuscript complies with the journal’s profile and requirements for authors. All submitted articles are subject to plagiarism control (anti-plagiarism program “AntiPlagiat”, Russia).

    1.3. If any discrepancies with the requirements are found, the author(s) will be notified and given the reasons for the rejection. Articles rejected at this stage are not peer-reviewed.

    1. Peer-review

    2.1. If the manuscript is considered relevant to the topic of the Journal and its requirements, it is sent for single-blind peer-review to several external peer-reviewers.

    2.2. The decision on peer-reviewers assignment is made by the editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief, or by Science Editor.

    2.3. Reviewing is done by members of the journal’s editorial board, the journal's editorial council and external reviewers from leading experts in the field working in areas of research that correspond to main topic of a manuscript.

    2.4. Each invited peer-reviewer has the right to withdraw from the peer-review. Peer review is free of charge and performed on a voluntary and gratuitous basis. The peer-reviewer should withdraw invitation if there is a clear conflict of interest that affects the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials (peer-reviewers should report the scientific, financial or any other relationship with the potential authors and editors of the journal.

    2.5. The manuscript is sent to external reviewers ("single-blind" peer-review), the authors don't know the identity of peer-reviewers, including their affiliations.

    2.6. “Single-blind” peer review is also applied for manuscripts submitted by Editorial Board members (authors do not know the peer reviewers' identity, including their affiliations).

    2.7. Peer-reviewers are informed that manuscripts sent to them are the property of authors and are classified as confidential information. Peer-reviewers must refrain from illegal use (including copying) of the materials sent to them for peer-review.

    2.8. Within 30 days from receipt of the manuscript peer-reviewers should render a reasoned opinion on the possibility of its publication in the present form, and present any claims about the manuscript in writing.

    2.9. The purpose of reviewing is to determine the compliance of manuscripts with the stated aims and scope and the subject area of the Journal. Manuscripts are reviewed for scientific novelty and relevance, clarity and comprehensibility, as well as compliance with all ethical standards in the appropriate field of research. Other objectives include supporting transparency, reproducibility and data sharing (including proper registration of trials).

    2.10. The peer-review should highlight the consistency of the article content with the topic stated in the title, the consistency of the article with the modern achievements of science and theoretical knowledge, evaluating language, style, arrangement of the material, clarity and informativeness of tables, charts, figures and completeness and correctness of literature citations, and advantages and disadvantages of the article. Review for Natural Science Series. The peer-reviewer also should indicate any amendments that should be made by the author.

    2.11. Peer-reviewer's possible conclusion:

    • the article can be published and does not require serious revision;
    • the article should be sent to other experts for peer-review;
    • the article should be revised by authors and should be re-valuated on the next round of peer-review before a final decision;
    • the article cannot be published owing to poor quality, inconsistency with the requirements of article design or topic of the journal, ethical violations, signs of falsification of results or other reasons.

    2.12. We provide all authors the access for peer-reviews texts (no peer-reviewers’ data are available for authors). Executive editor sends an Editorial decision to the authors by e-mail, the letter should contains the text of the peer-review and recommendations from the Editorial team.

    2.13. In case of a negative decision, the executive editor sends to the author a message with the peer-reviews and the reasons for rejection of a manuscript. The article, which has been rejected for publication, is not accepted for reconsideration.

    2.14. If the peer-review indicates that revisions are need, the manuscript is returned to the author(s) with the peer-reviews attached and a request to take into account the peer-reviewers’ comments when preparing a revised version of the manuscript. Within the revision author(s) should provide responses to all the peer-reviewers’ questions, comments and suggestions. In a case of any disagreements with a peer-reviewer's suggestions, the author(s) should clearly justify their point of view. The revised manuscript should be submitted to the editor within 2 months from receipt of the editorial decision. In case of absence after this time, the manuscript will be rejected. Revised manuscript and the response to a peer-review are sent to peer-reviewers for the next step of evaluation.

    2.15. If the authors refuse to revise the manuscript they should notify the Editorial Board about the withdrawal of the article from the journal.

    2.16. If the author and the reviewer have irresolvable contradictions regarding the article, the editorial board has the right to send the article to another peer-reviewer. In conflict situations, the author has the right to appeal against the decision of the editorial board. The appeal is submitted to the Editor-in-Chief, who makes the final decision. An appeal can be filed only once.

    1. Editorial board evaluation and final decision

    3.1. The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient basis for the publication of an article. The final editorial decision is made by the Editorial Board and the Editor-in-Chief, and in controversial situations - only by the Editor-in-Chief. The Executive editor sends all manuscripts with positive peer-reviews to the editorial board and the editor-in-chief for consideration.

    3.2. After the editorial board approved an article for publication, the executive editor informs the author on the decision and indicates the potential issue of the journal to be published in. The text of reviews is the obligate part of these massages.

    3.3. All approved manuscripts are objects for scientific editing, copyediting, layout preparation and proofreading before publication. The Editorial Board reserves the right to edit the submitted articles (including their titles). Before publication the layout of the article is sent to corresponding author in *.pdf format by email to proofread for misprints in the text, tables, and figures.

    3.4. Aссepted articles are distributed in the nearest issues of the journal in the order of their receipt. The Editorial Board has the right to change the order of publication of articles.

    1. Peer-reviews history and distribution

    4.1 Reviews are kept in the editorial office for five years.

    4.2. The editors send the author(s) of submitted manuscripts copies of reviews and also assure to send copies of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation upon receiving a relevant request.

    4.3. Information on peer-reviewing, including the texts of reviews and peer-reviewers’ data can be transferred to the Scientific Electronic Library (Russia) and other systems of accounting and evaluation of reviewing (like Publons and ORCID) in arrangement with peer-reviewers.

    4.4. All rejected and withdrawn manuscripts are placed in the Editorial Board archive, to which the reviewers have no access.

 

Publication Frequency

The Journal is published 4 times a year

 

Open Access Policy

The “Vestnik Samarskogo universiteta. Estestvennonauchnaya seriya / Vestnik of Samara University. Natural Science Series” provides immediate open access to all articles published therein on the basis of principles formulated in the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition, and applies the CC BY 4.0 Licence to all content we publish. The journal provides direct Open Access to its content on the basis of the following principle: free open access to the results of research contributes to the increase of global knowledge sharing.

 

Archiving

The journal uses the PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN) to digitally preserve all the published articles. The PKP PN is a part of LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) program offers decentralized and distributed preservation, seamless perpetual access, and preservation of the authentic original version of the content.

Also, the journal makes full-text archives on the Russian Science Electronic Library (http://elibrary.ru/) platform.

 

Publication Ethics

ETHICAL NORMS OF SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS 

The ethical norms of scientific publications imply that participants in the research and publishing community adhere to certain general principles and rules of interaction that will increase the number of high-quality scientific publications, as well as successful and fruitful collaboration of authors, reviewers, publishers and readers of scientific publications (“Ethical Principles of Scientific Publications” Declaration developed by Association of Scienсe Editors and Publishers (ANRI), as well as recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

• International standards for authors

• Code of Conduct and Best Practices for Journal Editors;

• Ethical principles for reviewers;

• Code of Conduct for magazine publishers;

• The White Book of the Council of Scientific Editors on the observance of the principles of the integrity of publications in scientific journals;

Requirements to the ethics of scientific publications

Ethical norms of scientific publications assume observation by the participants of scientific and publishing community of certain general principles and rules of interaction, that serve enhancement of a number of qualitative scientific publications and also successful and effective cooperation of authors, reviewers, publishers and readers of scientific publications.

    1. General principles.

1.1. In the process of cooperation, authors, reviewers, publishers and readers of scientific publications should be polite, tactful, avoid conflict situations, solving the questions aroused in creative, constructive and productive spring.

1.2. Deliberate assignment of authorship of an alien work of science, alien ideas and inventions, fraud of data is not allowed. Plagiarism is a violation of author-legal and patent legislation and may lead to legal responsibility.

1.3. The article should be original, contain element of new knowledge and be given for publication for the first time.

1.4. Non published data, received from manuscript presented to consideration should not be used or given to the third person without written author’s consent. Information or ideas received in the process of peer-reviewing and editorship and connected with potential dividends, should remain confidential and not used with the aim of getting self-profit.

    2. Author (or group of authors) 

2.1 Author (or group of authors) of publication have responsibility for novelty and authenticity of results of scientific research. Borrowed fragments or statements should be formed with the obligatory indication of an author and primary source of information. Excessive borrowings, and also plagiarism in any form, including unshaped citations, paraphrasing or assignment of rights on the results of alien researches, are unethical and unacceptable. All the manuscripts in the Journal «Vestnik Samarskogo universiteta. Estestvennonauchnaya seriya / Vestnik of Samara University. Natural Science Series» are objects for plagiarism searching by the program «Antiplagiat». The journal is not allow authors to publish articles with plagiarisms.

2.2. Co-authors of the article should indicate all persons that brought in a substantial contribution in carrying out research.

2.3. Author has a right to be acquainted with the results of peer-reviewing and comments of the reviewer and remove mistakes required by a reviewer or an editor.

2.4. If an author finds substantial errors or mistakes in the article on the stage of its reviewing or after its publishing, he should as quickly as possible inform about it the journal staff.

    3. Reviewer(s) 

3.1 Reviewer(s) carries (carry) out scientific expertise of author’s materials, regarding them as confidential document which should not be given for acquaintance or consideration to the third person that have no rights for it from the editorial staff.

3.2. Reviewer(s) must give objective and substantiated estimate to the stated results of an investigation. Personal critique of an author is unacceptable.

3.3. The anonymity of reviewer(s) must be observed.

3.4. Reviewer(s) that doesn’t have, according to his opinion, competence for estimation of a manuscript or cannot be impersonal, should tell the publisher about it with a request to exclude him from the process of peer reviewing of the given manuscript.

    4. Publisher of a scientific journal

4.1. Publisher of a scientific journal at decision taking about publication goes by the authenticity of data presentation and scholarly importance of the considered work

    4.2. Publisher should evaluate intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, nationality, social standing or political preferences of the authors.

    4.3. Editor combined with publisher should not leave without an answer accusations that concern the viewed manuscripts or published materials, and also at revelation of conflict situation take all necessary measures for restoration of violated rights.

 

Author Fees

Publication in “Vestnik Samarskogo universiteta. Estestvennonauchnaya seriya / Vestnik of Samara University. Natural Science Series” is free of charge for all the authors.

The journal doesn’t have any article processing and submission charges.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies