Editorial Policies

Aims and Scope

The journal accepts the original articles (manuscripts) on the humanities for publication

  • 5.7. Philosophy (Social sciences and humanities)
    5.7.1. Ontology and theory of knowledge
    5.7.6. Philosophy of science
    5.7.7. Social and political philosophy

  • 5.9. Philology (Social sciences and humanities)
    5.9.1. Russian literature and literature of the peoples of the Russian Federation
    5.9.3. Literary theory

  • 5.4. Sociology (Social sciences and humanities)
    5.4.2. Economic sociology
    5.4.4. Social structure, social institutions and processes
    5.4.7. Management sociology




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

Information. News. Events

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

All scientific materials published in the journal are subject to peer review.

The articles submitted to the scientific journal shall be presented in accordance with the “Requirements for Presentation of Articles” placed at the end of each issue of the journal. The articles submitted in violation of the above requirements will not be considered.

The articles shall be submitted to the editorial office in the electronic form by email: semiotic@ssau.ru or via the journal website https://journals.ssau.ru/semiotic

All the articles submitted to the scientific journal are recorded in the registration book by a responsible secretary with specifying the date of receipt by the editorial office.

Upon registration, all the scientific articles shall be submitted via a responsible secretary for the external independent review without specifying the names of authors and information about them (double-blind peer review) for their expert evaluation. The information about the reviewer selected by the editorial team of the journal is introduced in the registration book. The review period is 1 to 2 months.

Only the articles, which have been reviewed and recommended for publishing, shall be published in the journal. Scientists with a solid reputation in that particular field who have publications on the subject matter of the considered article during the last three years shall be involved as reviewers. The reviewers give a substantiated conclusion on the scientific value of the represented material and its compliance with the journal requirements.

If there is an indication in the article review, that the paper should be reworked by the author, it is returned to the author for eliminating the deficiencies or inaccuracies.

If the review result is positive, a confirmation on inclusion of the article to the corresponding issue is sent by email to the authors.

In case of the negative review, the article is declined by decision of the editorial team. The respective mark “Publish”, “Returned for rework”, “Decline” is made in the registration book upon review.

As a rule, the articles are published in the order of precedence. If the article is returned to the author for reworking, its final version is published in the next issue from the moment of receipt of the reworked article. The editorial team is entitled to change the publishing order of articles.

If the editorial team does not fully share the opinion expressed by the author of the published article, it is entitled to make a respective footnote. The articles published in the order of discussion may also be accompanied by the respective footnote.

The editorial team is entitled to publish letters of readers containing substantiated evaluation of published articles.

Copies of both positive and negative reviews containing motivated rejection without specifying the reviewer’s name are sent to the authors of the articles.

Copies of reviews are sent to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation upon the receipt of the corresponding request by the editorial office.

The reviews of scientific articles are stored for 5 years.


Open Access Policy

The articles of this journal are available to everyone from the moment of publication, which provides free open access to the results of research and contributes to the progress of science.



The journal uses the network PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN) for the purpose of digital archiving of all published articles. PKP PN is a part of backup program infrastructure “LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe)”, providing decentralized and distributed storage, seamless access and restoring the original input version of the information content in case of its loss by the editor.

Moreover, the electronic copies of the published articles / papers are stored on the web site of Scientific Electronic Library (eLibrary.ru).


The ethics of academic papers

Ethic standards of academic papers provide for the compliance with particular general principles and rules of interaction by the participants of the research and publishing community, which would increase the number of high-quality academic papers and favour the successful and fruitful cooperation between authors, reviewers, publishers and readers of academic papers.

During their cooperation, the authors, reviewers, publishers and readers of academic papers should be polite, tactful, avoid conflict situations while solving the arising issues in a creative, constructive and effective manner.

Deliberate appropriation of authorship of someone else’s work of science, ideas and inventions, data falsifications are prohibited. Plagiarism is a violation of copyright and patent legislation, which may result in legal responsibility.

The article shall be original, contain a new knowledge component and be submitted for publication for the first time.

The unpublished data obtained from the manuscripts submitted for review, shall not be used by or transferred to third parties without the author’s written permission. The information or ideas obtained as a result of reviewing and editing and related to possible advantages, shall be kept confidential and shall not be used to obtain personal profit.

THE AUTHOR (or the team of authors) of an article shall be responsible for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific studies. The borrowed fragments or statements shall be provided with mandatory specification of the author and source. Excessive borrowings as well as plagiarism in any forms including failure to make quotations, paraphrasing or appropriation of rights in the results of somebody else’s studies are unethical and unacceptable.

All the persons making a substantial contribution to the research shall be indicated as co-authors of papers.

The author shall have a right to familiarize with the results of review and reviewer’s comments, eliminate the drawbacks pointed out by the reviewer or editor.

If the author detects substantial mistakes or omissions in the paper at the review stage or after its publishing, he or she shall inform the journal’s editorial office thereof as soon as possible.

THE REVIEWER shall perform scientific expert review of the author’s materials while treating them as a confidential document not subject to transfer for familiarization or discussion to third parties not having the editorial office’s authorities to that.

The reviewer shall provide an unbiased and substantiated evaluation to the stated results of research. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.

The reviewer shall be kept anonymous.

The reviewer which, according to his or her opinion, does not have sufficient qualifications to evaluate the manuscript or may not be unbiased, shall inform the editor thereof with requesting to eliminate him / her from the process of review of the given manuscript.

THE EDITOR OF a scientific journal, in making the decision on publication, shall be governed by the reliability of submission of data and scientific merit of the reviewed work.

The editor shall evaluate intellectual contents of manuscripts irrespective of race, sex, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship, social status or political preferences of authors.

The editor, jointly with the publisher, shall not leave uncommented claims related to the reviewed manuscripts or published materials. When detecting a conflict situation, they shall take all the necessary measures to remedy the violated rights.

This website uses cookies

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

About Cookies