Примите участие со статьей
You are here
Home > Publication requirements > Publication requirements, Ethical guidelines, Copyright and Access

Publication requirements, Ethical guidelines, Copyright and Access

The articles should be sent as an attachment by e-mail to the editorial office: rusistikabg@gmail.com. In a separate text document a reference about the author should be sent with the following information: name, surname, academic degree, academic title, place of work, position, city, country, home address, contact phone number, email address.
The papers submitted for publication should be original, previously unpublished work not currently under review by other publishers. The papers can be presented in Russian, Bulgarian or English.
Copyright policy
The papers are published free of cost. All rights are reserved by the authors of the publications in the Scientific Journal. The author agrees not to publish the paper prior to its publication by the Publisher.
Access policy
The Scientific Journal is available in electronic format as a PDF document free of charge.
The journal is published four times per year: March 30, June 30, September 30 and December 30. The papers are accepted until the 15th of March, June, September and December.
Indexed in (RSCI/РИНЦ) (http://www.eLibrary.ru) and ErihPlus.
Format: Microsoft Word.
Page size: A4.
Font: Times New Roman, 12 pt.
Line spacing: single.
Margins: top and bottom – 2.5 cm, left and right – 2.5 cm.
Paragraph indentation: 1 cm.
Without numbering, text alignment: justified.
  • If the article is written in Russian, then in Russian should be stated the author’s surname, name, position, title, academic degree; full name of the organization; country, city; e-mail address, the title of the article, abstract, keywords, after the same information should be stated in English. The Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) of the article should be also included.
  • When writing the abstract, you must adhere to the established limit of 850 characters without spaces, at least 10 lines. The abstract should include relevance, problem statement, subject and methodology, results and conclusion.
  • For example:
УДК 81
Иванов Виктор Борисович
доктор филологических наук, профессор
Московский государственный университет им. М.В. Ломоносова
Россия, г. Москва
e-mail: ivanov@rambler.ru
Ivanov Viktor Borisovich
Professor, Dr. Sc. (Philology)
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russia, Moscow
e-mail: ivanov@rambler.ru
В.Б. Иванов
(12 pt.)
Аннотация. 11 пт., до 800 знаков с пробелами
Ключевые слова: 11 пт., не более 10 слов
V.B. Ivanov
(12 pt.)
Abstract. 11 pt., up to 800 characters with spaces
Keywords: 11 pt., up to 10 words
  • If the article is written in Bulgarian, then in Bulgarian should be stated the author’s surname, name, position, title, academic degree; full name of the organization; country, city; e-mail address, the title of the article, abstract, keywords, after the same information should be stated in English. The Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) of the article should be also included.
  • If the article is written in English, then in English should be stated the author’s surname, name, position, title, academic degree; full name of the organization; country, city; e-mail address, the title of the article, abstract, keywords, after the same information should be stated in Russian. The Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) of the article should be also included.
The text in Russian/Bulgarian/English: 12 pt, up to 20,000 characters with spaces. The footnotes – page by page, at the bottom of the page, Arabic numbers, 10 pt. The bibliographic references should be enclosed in square brackets [current number from References, page], as in [2],[7, p. 84]. Examples should be given in Italic. Angle quotes like «» are used. Graphics, pictures and photos are inserted in the text after the first mention of them. The name of the illustrations should be written below with the word «Figure.1» (10 pt).
The references (11 PT.) are listed in alphabetical order after the text of the article in original language, then if there are sources in Cyrillic they should be transliteratied into Latin, the references should be also translated into English in accordance with the requirements of GOST 7.1-2003 (ГОСТ 7.1-2003). The initials shouldn`t be separated by spaces. In the references only cited works in the text should be included. For example:
  1. Горшков Л.М. Русский язык и культура речи // Стиль. – 2006. – № 4. – С. 65–70.
  2. Иванова Н.П. Диалог в образовании. – М.: Экспресс, 2011. – 156 с.
References in Roman script
  1. Gorshkov L.M. Russkiy yazayk i kulytura rechi // Stily. – 2006. – № 4. – S. 65–70.
  2. Ivanova N.P. Dialog v obrazovanii. – M.: Ekspress, 2011. – 156 s.
  1. Gorshkov L.M. Russian language and speech culture. Style, 2006, no 4, pp.65-70. (In Russian).
  2. Ivanova N.P. Dialogue in education. Мoscow, Express Publ., 2011. 156 p. (In Russian).
The papers that do not meet all the criteria above shouldn`t be accepted.
The peer review process is a process by which our experts evaluate scholarly works. Its objective is to ensure a high quality of the published articles. In our peer-reviewed journal, the decision-making authority is represented by the journal editors and the journal’s international editorial board. Our Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the decision making process.
Journal decision-making process
After a paper is submitted to our journal “Russian studies without borders”, the Editor-in-Chief screens the manuscript and decides whether or not to send it for full peer review. The manuscripts that do not meet all our criteria wouldn`t be accepted before peer review. The manuscript is sent to our two peer reviewers only after clearing the initial screening. Finally, our journal editors and our journal’s international editorial board consider the peer reviewers’ reports and make the final decision to accept or reject the manuscript for publication. The author is informed of the decision.
The journal “Russian studies without borders” doesn`t tolerate academic misconduct, such as duplicate publication, plagiarism, fabrication of data, fake external reviewer suggestions. All manuscripts are investigated regarding potential unethical conduct. Regarding the plagiarism, all submissions will be checked for potential copy-paste jobs using The Autoplagiat program (Russia).
Editor’s Responsibilities:
A.1. Publication decisions
Editor-in-Chief of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts should be published. Editors and reviewers treat all manuscripts as confidential documents do not show to or discussed with others except if authorized by the editor.
A.2. Fair play
The editor evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the nature of the authors or the host institution including race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
A.3. Confidentiality
The editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and other editorial advisers as appropriate. In the case of a misconduct investigation, the editor-in-chief may disclose material to third parties (e.g., an institutional investigation committee or other editors).
A.4. Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research.
A.5. Corrections
When genuine errors in published work are pointed out by readers, authors, or editors, a correction will be published as soon as possible. If the error renders the work or substantial parts of it invalid, the paper should be retracted with an explanation as to the reason for retraction.
A.6. Ensuring the integrity of the published record
If serious concerns are raised by readers, reviewers, or others, about the conduct, validity, or reporting of academic work, the editor-in-chief will initially contact the authors and allow them to respond to the concerns.
Reviewers’ responsibilities:
B.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Reviewers are expected to provide constructive comments on the manuscript that help the author(s) to revise the manuscript in higher standards and quality.
B.2. Promptness
Reviewers that feel unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
B.3. Confidentiality
The reviewers should treat as confidential document any manuscripts received for review. The manuscript should not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
B.4. Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
B.5. Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
B.6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
B.7. Reviewer misconduct
Our journal will take reviewer misconduct seriously and pursue any allegation of breach of confidentiality, non-declaration of conflicts of interest (financial or non-financial), inappropriate use of confidential material, or delay of peer review for competitive advantage.
Authors’ responsibilities:
C.1. Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.
C.2. Originality and Plagiarism
Authors should ensure that submitted work is original and has not been published elsewhere in any language, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Applicable copyright laws and conventions should be followed. Copyright material (e.g. tables, figures or extensive quotations) should be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement.
C.3. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
C.4. Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
C.5. Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
C.6. Individual and organizational acknowledgments
All of the individuals or organizations that made a contribution to the work but they do not meet the criteria for authorship, should be acknowledged in the acknowledgments section of the manuscript. The corresponding author should not acknowledge any individual or organization without a written permission.
Editorial board