REVIEWING OF THE JOURNAL
Every paper submitted for publishing in journal “Technologization of the socio-economic sphere” shall be reviewed.
Reviewing is blind (anonymous) on one side — the reviewer knows the names of the authors, while the authors do not know the names of the reviewers.
Within one day after the paper submission, the authorized secretary shall forward the paper to Deputy Editor responsible for a corresponding science field to select reviewers, who can be appointed from specialists with PhD or Doctor degree in the respective field of science. The members of the Editorial Board can be reviewers as well.
The Deputy Editor chooses a reviewer within three days. The authorized secretary forwards the manuscript to the reviewer within one day.
The reviewer makes a review (fill in the form below), and he or she e-mails it to the authorized secretary (centrRPA@yandex.ru) within 3 weeks after he or she receives the paper.
The reviewer can recommend the paper to be accepted for publication; recommend it to be accepted for publication with revision; or recommend to decline the paper. If the reviewer recommends the paper to be accepted for publication with revision, or recommends the paper to be declined, he or she is to provide reasons for such decision in the review.
If the paper is recommended for publication with revision, the authorized secretary shall forward the review to the author for revision.
Upon receiving the revised paper the authorized secretary forwards the manuscript it to the same reviewer for another review within one day.
In case the material is declined, the authorized secretary e-mails the review to the author and points out the possibility of repeated reviewing at the author’s discretion. The reviewer’s name will be revealed to the author only by a written consent of the reviewer.
In case the paper is rejected for the second time, the authorized secretary e-mails the review to the author. The paper can not be reviewed more than two times.
The paper is forwarded for technical editing after reviewing. The Technical Editor can reject the paper and send it to the author for revision to make sure it meets all formal and technical requirements. The paper can be rejected by the Editor-in-Chief/Editor responsible for a specific science field for the reasons of his or her disagreement with the review, discovered conflict of interests, or violation of ethics.
Most common reasons for declining
— the paper has poor or incorrect structure
— the paper is not enough detailed for readers to fully understand the analysis offered by the authors
— the paper has no scientific novelty
— the paper has not enough relevant references
— the paper contains theories, concepts or conclusions that are not properly substantiated by necessary data, argumentations or information
— the paper does not provide detailed enough description of methods and materials, which would allow other researchers to repeat the experiment
— the paper lacks clear descriptions or explanations of verifiable hypotheses, details and stages of experiments, examples of statistical or experimental samples
— the paper gives poor description of conducted experiments, or contains errors and mistakes, or does not include statistical analysis
— the paper is written with the language that does not meet the requirements to a scientific paper
— the paper contains unsubstantiated criticism towards the existing fundamental propositions, generally accepted theories and facts
— the paper has an expressed political character, and contains statements and appeals inconsistent with generally accepted norms.
IF YOUR PAPER WAS DECLINED
— consider all the points that the editor and the reviewer have commented on;
— describe all the revisions made to your paper in your cover letter;
— conduct all additional experiments or analyses recommended by the reviewer (if you are sure that those changes will not make your paper better, please substantiate this opinion in detail);
— in the cover letter describe all the reviewer’s comments you agree with, and those you disagree with;
— provide polite and scientific substantiation of all the comments you do not agree with;
— please highlight all revisions and changes you made in your paper;
— send the revised manuscript together with your cover letter within the period of time set by the editor.
ETHICS OF SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATION
Primary Responsibilities of the Publisher
(1) Preserving the Scientific Archive: The publisher plays a critical role in supporting the work of editors and reviewers in preserving the integrity of the journal's scientific archive. This includes providing resources, ensuring adherence to best publishing practices, and maintaining editorial standards.
(2) Protecting Editorial Independence: The publisher is committed to preventing any external influence (financial or otherwise) on editorial decisions.
Primary Responsibilities of Editors
(1) Publication Decisions: The editor-in-chief has ultimate responsibility for deciding whether to publish articles based on their significance and scientific value to researchers and readers.
(2) Peer Review Process: Editors ensure a fair, objective, and timely review process by selecting appropriately qualified reviewers and promoting inclusivity and diversity. (3) Fairness and Transparency: Manuscripts are evaluated solely on their scientific merit, and editorial policies are openly communicated.
(4) Confidentiality: Editors ensure the confidentiality of all materials submitted to the journal and of communications with reviewers.
(5) Conflicts of Interest: Any potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed and considered when making editorial decisions.
Primary Responsibilities of Reviewers
(1) Assistance in Editorial Decision Making: Reviewers provide constructive feedback, assisting editors in their decisions and helping authors improve their manuscripts.
(2) Confidentiality: Manuscripts under review are treated as confidential and must not be disclosed to third parties.
(3) Ethical Standards and Independence: Reviewers must evaluate submissions objectively, avoiding personal bias or conflicts of interest.
Primary Responsibilities of Authors
(1) Accountability and Standards: Authors must accurately represent their research, providing detailed, reliable, and reproducible data.
(2) Data Access and Storage: Authors must make data available upon request and ensure that they are securely stored for review.
(3) Originality and Attribution: Authors are responsible for ensuring the originality of their work, correctly citing previous research, and avoiding plagiarism. Manuscripts should not duplicate previous publications, with the exception of conference abstracts or theses.
(4) Authorship Criteria: Authorship is restricted to individuals who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study.
(5) Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest: Manuscripts must include disclosure of any relationships that might be perceived as a potential conflict of interest.
(6) Error Notification: If a significant error or inaccuracy is discovered in a published work, authors should promptly notify the editor and cooperate in correcting or retracting the article.
PRINCIPLES OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND RESPONSIBILITY
Researchers have the right to freely conduct research and share their results without censorship, while adhering to principles of intellectual integrity and avoiding harm to individuals, society, or the environment.
Positive and Negative Impacts of Research
Research must respect the dignity and rights of subjects and communities, as well as tangible and intangible heritage, natural resources, and the environment. Indirect harms, such as stigmatization of vulnerable groups or misuse of results, must be considered.
Ethical Review of Research on Humans and Animals
Research involving human subjects requires informed consent and approval from an ethics committee. Statements confirming compliance with ethical standards must be included in the manuscript.
Editorial Independence
The journal ensures that editorial decisions are based solely on scientific criteria, free from commercial or external influences. This includes decisions on peer review, acceptance, rejection, and publication. Appeals Policy
Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a written request within one month of receiving the decision. Appeals are considered only for manuscripts that have passed peer review. Appeals must include detailed responses to editorial and peer review comments, supported by evidence.
Authorship
Each author must have made a significant contribution to the conception, execution, or interpretation of the work. The corresponding author ensures approval of the manuscript by all co-authors and assumes responsibility for communication with the journal.
Acknowledgment of Contribution
The journal promotes transparency by publishing statements detailing the contributions of each author.
Author Identification
Authors are encouraged to provide an ORCID identifier to enhance the transparency of the publication process.
AUTHORS' POLICY
Permission to Use Materials by Third Parties
The journal's policy on obtaining permission to use third-party materials includes the following key provisions:
Required Permissions
Any reproduction of substantial portions of copyrighted works requires formal permission from the copyright holder. This applies to text and visual materials, such as illustrations, diagrams, tables, and photographs.
Obtaining Permissions
To obtain permission to use materials published by another publisher, authors should:
Identify the copyright holder for the material.
Contact the copyright holder for formal written permission.
Ensure the permission clearly covers the intended use, stating that it is for publication in a research article.
Permission Documentation.
The manuscript must be accompanied by a written permission slip and appropriately referenced as specified by the copyright holder.
Authors' Responsibilities
Authors are responsible for ensuring:
Permission documentation.
Compliance with license terms (e.g., Creative Commons).
Proper attribution in the text of the article or in figure/table legends.
Exceptions.
Permission is not required for:
1. Public domain materials.
2. Materials licensed under open licenses (e.g., Creative Commons) provided the license terms are followed.
Data Access
The journal supports the transparency and reproducibility of research. Authors should provide additional data upon request to support the results reported in their article.
Formats and Access
Data must be provided in reusable formats (e.g., CSV, Excel, PDF, Word). Data may be:
Submitted directly to the editors through the journal platform.
Deposited in public repositories such as Zenodo or Mendeley Data.
Confidentiality
Supplementary data provided for review will remain confidential and will be accessible only to reviewers and the editorial team.
Publication of Supplementary Data
Authors are encouraged to publish supplementary data in open-access public repositories, citing the repository in the article to ensure transparency and future scientific use.
GENERATIVE AI USE POLICY
With the development of generative AI and AI-enabled technologies, which are increasingly being used by authors in the creation of scientific manuscripts, the journal "Technologization of the socio-economic sphere" has developed a policy regulating their use. The journal will closely monitor developments in this field and revise its policy as necessary.
Policy for Authors
Use of Generative AI and AI-enabled Tools in Scientific Writing
This policy applies exclusively to the writing process and does not extend to the use of AI for data analysis or drawing scientific conclusions during research.
Purpose of AI Use
Authors may use generative AI and AI tools solely to enhance the readability and linguistic quality of their manuscripts. Such tools must be used under human supervision, and the output must be carefully reviewed and edited by the authors. It is important to recognize that AI can generate text that appears authoritative but may contain inaccuracies, incomplete information, or bias.
Responsibility and Disclosure
Authors are solely responsible for the content of their work. The use of AI tools must be disclosed in the manuscript, and this disclosure will be included in the published article to ensure transparency and build trust among all participants in the publication process.
Exclusion of AI as Authors
AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Authorship implies responsibility and the performance of tasks that only humans can perform. Authors must ensure that their work is original, complies with ethical standards, and does not infringe the rights of third parties.
Use of AI in Illustrations and Graphic Content
Prohibition of Images Created or Modified with Artificial Intelligence
The use of generative AI or AI tools to create, modify, or process images in manuscripts is prohibited. Adjustments to brightness, contrast, and color balance are permitted only if they do not distort the data presented.
Exception
If the use of AI is part of the research methodology (e.g., biomedical imaging), it must be described in detail in the "Methodology" section, including the name and characteristics of the AI tool used.
Reviewer Policy
Confidentiality and Use of AI Tools
Manuscripts under review are confidential documents, and uploading them or any portions of them to AI tools is prohibited, as this may violate the author's confidentiality and intellectual property rights. This rule also applies to review comments, which may contain confidential information about the manuscript and its authors.
The use of generative AI to assist scientific peer review is not permitted, as the peer review process requires critical thinking and independent judgment, which are beyond the capabilities of AI. Reviewers are solely responsible for the content of their reviews.
AI in Editorial Tools
The journal permits the use of safe artificial intelligence technologies for tasks such as manuscript completeness checks, plagiarism detection, and finding appropriate reviewers, provided confidentiality standards are maintained.
Editor Policy
Manuscript Confidentiality
All manuscripts submitted for review must remain confidential. Uploading manuscripts or any portions thereof to AI tools is prohibited, as this may violate authors' rights and confidentiality. Similarly, the use of generative AI to assist in editorial decision-making is prohibited.
Manuscript evaluation requires critical thinking and an objective approach, which can only be provided by human editors. Editors are ultimately responsible for the editorial process, making final decisions regarding manuscripts, and communicating these decisions to authors.
DISCLOSURE AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY
To ensure transparency and allow readers to assess potential biases, the journal "Technologization of the socio-economic sphere" requires authors to declare any financial and/or non-financial interests related to the research being reported. The corresponding author is responsible for submitting a conflict of interest declaration on behalf of all authors of the article.
A conflict of interest is defined as any financial or non-financial interest that could directly undermine, or be perceived to undermine, the objectivity, integrity, or value of the publication, potentially influencing the authors' judgment and actions regarding the objective presentation, analysis, and interpretation of data.
Authors must disclose any conflicts of interest during the manuscript submission process through the submission system. The corresponding author must provide a declaration on behalf of all authors. In cases of double anonymity, reviewers will receive a minimal statement indicating the presence of financial or non-financial interests to avoid disclosing the authors' identities. Regardless of the peer review model, all authors must include a conflict of interest statement at the end of their published article, using one of the following standard statements:
"The authors declare the following conflicts of interest: ..."
"The authors declare no conflicts of interest."
"The authors declare that confidentiality agreements prevent disclosure of conflicts of interest related to this work."
