Aims and Scope

Journal «Vestnik of Samara University. History, pedagogics, philology» is a scientific publication, which publishes the results of original research, including materials of scientific conferences, dissertation, as well as reviews and comments on the scientific literature.

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

Theme of Journal:

07.00.00 – Historical science and archeology;

10.02.00 – Linguistics;

13.00.00 – Pedagogical sciences.

The main directions for Scopus:

Arts and Humanities Education



Communications and Media






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




Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process


submitting, peer review and publication of articles in the scientific journal
«Vestnik of Samara University. History, pedagogics, philology»


4. Order of submitting, peer review, adoption, refusal and publishing of articles


4.1. Articles in the scientific journal «Vestnik of Samara University. History, pedagogics, philology» are filled out in accordance with the «Requirements to the design of articles» that are placed in the end of each issue of the journal and on the website Articles that are presented with the violation of the before-mentioned requirements are not considered.

4.2. The articles are sent to the editorial staff of the journal in the printed form by an insured letter at such an address: room 312 b, building 22a, 34, Moskovskoye shosse, Samara, 443086,Russian Federation marked «Vestnik of Samara University. History, pedagogics, philology». Signatures of all the authors on the printed variant of an article acknowledge its uniqueness. Electronic version of the document should be send by e-mail:

4.3. All presented in the scientific journal articles are recorded in the registration log by the executive editor with the indication of date of entry in the editorial staff.

4.4. After registration scientific articles are delivered through the executive secretary on external independent peer review without the indication of surname, given name, patronymic and information about them (double-blind peer review). In the registration log the information about the reader selected by the editorial board or by the editorial team of the journal. The term of peer review is 1–2 months.

4.5. The journal publishes only those articles that are reviewed and recommended for publication. As the reviewers, reputable scholars in the given field that have publications on this subject in the last 3 years are engaged, which give a reasoned expert opinion on the scientific value of the material presented and its compliance with the requirements of the journal.

4.6. If in the peer review on the article there is indication on the necessity of its refinement by the author, executive editor or publishing editor sends it to the author for correction of drawbacks or inaccuracies indicated by the reader.

4.7. At positive review authors by email are sent confirmation about the inclusion of an article in the corresponding issue of the journal.

4.8. At negative review the article according to the decision of the editorial board is rejected. In the registration log after getting review the corresponding mark «Publish», «For renewal», «Reject» is placed.

4.9. The articles are published as a rule in the order of precedence of their entry. If the article is sent to the author for renewal, then the final version of the paper is published in the next, from the moment of entry of the improved article, issue of the journal. The editorial board of the journal has a right to change the priority of publication of the articles.

4.10. In case if the editorial board doesn’t share fully the viewpoint of the author of the published article, it has a right to make a footnote about this. Articles published in course of discussion can also be accompanied by a footnote.

4.11. The editorial board has a right to publish letters of the readers that contain substantiated estimate of the published articles.

4.12. Copies of positive as well as negative reviews without indication of the family name of the reader are sent to the authors of the articles

4.13. The copies of the reviews are sent to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation at entry of the request therefore in the editorial department

4.14. Reviews on the articles are kept for 5 years.


Open Access Policy

Статьи этого журнала доступны всем желающим с момента публикации, что обеспечивает свободный открытый доступ к результатам исследований и способствует прогрессу науки и медицины.



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 ( platform.


Publication Ethics

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;

    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.

    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.

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

    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.

    5. 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.

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

    7. 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.

    8. 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.

    9. Reviewer carries 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.

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

    11. A double blind review is accepted in the journal (the anonymity of the reviewer and the author is observed, the reviewer and the author cannot be from the same organization).

    12. Reviewer 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.

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

    14. 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.

    15. Copy 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.

This website uses cookies

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

About Cookies