- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
- » Revenue Sources
- » Generative AI policies for journals
Aim and Scope
The major purpose for the Journal is to publish the results obtained from research projects carried out by scientists of North-Caucasus Federal University as well as of other authors, whose works are of high theoretical and practical value.
Section Policies
Open Submissions
Peer ReviewedPublication Frequency
6 issues per year
Open Access Policy
This is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediately upon publication.
Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.
For more information please read BOAI statement.
The year of the transition of the journal to open access is 2013.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
The rules of submission, reviewing and publication of scientific manuscripts in Newsletter of North-Caucasus Federal University.
- An original article is accepted for consideration only if it meets the requirements for publication in Newsletter of North-Caucasus Federal University, which are posted on the official website of NCFU in the “Scientific Publications” section and in current issues of the journal.
- An article formatted in violation of the requirements shall not be considered and shall not be returned.
- The article shall be registered by the editors in the article registration journal, indicating the date of submission, title, author(s)’s name(s), and the author(s)’s affiliation. Each article is assigned an individual registration number.
- All the articles submitted shall be subject to single-blind review for the purpose of their expert assessment if they correspond to its subject matter. All reviewers are recognized experts in the subject matter of the materials being reviewed and have publications on the subject matter of the article over the past 3 years.
- The Editor-in-Chief determines the compliance of the article with the profile of the journal, the technical requirements, and forwards it for review. The articles that do not belong to the respective fields shall not be returned to the author while the latter shall be notified of the issue.
- The reviewers are members of the editorial board and external reviewers – scientists and specialists in the given field (doctors, candidates of science). Each manuscript is sent for evaluation to external reviewers supervising the corresponding branch of science, members of the editorial board are involved in reviewing if it is not possible for some reason to obtain an external review. Also, members of the editorial board can be involved in reviewing in controversial cases and if necessary to obtain a third opinion. Each article is sent for verification to two reviewers. The decision on choosing one or another reviewer to conduct an examination of the article is made by the Editor-in-Chief, Executive secretary.
- An article submitted for a review shall be reviewed and returned back to the Editor’s office within 30 calendar days since it was received; otherwise there must be a reasonable response provided explaining the refusal to review the article. The total review period is 4-6 weeks.
- The Editor’s Office forwards the author(s) of the respective article copies of reviews or motivated rejections. Copies of reviews may be submitted, upon a request, to the Ministry of Education and Science, Russian Federation.
- The reviewer’s identity shall remain confidential and closed to the author, and can be disclosed to the latter upon their written request, yet with no signature, surname, position, and employer of the reviewer. A review disclosing the expert’s identity may be submitted, upon a request, to the expert Committees of the National Attestation Committee (VAK) of Ministry of Education and Science, Russian Federation.
- A review must contain the following information: a general analysis of the scientific level, the terminology used, the structure of the article, and the relevance of the theme; the potential to be published in view of the language and the style employed, as well as the compatibility between the title and the content, and compliance with the technical requirements; an analysis of the presentation manner, and the compliance of the methods, methodologies, recommendations and the outcomes with the contemporary state of scientific advance.
- A reviewer may recommend a respective manuscript to be published; to be published after certain amendment in view of the respective comment; or not to be published. In case an article is recommended to be further amended or not to be published, such a review shall come with the reasons behind the decision.
- A reviewer may recommend a respective manuscript to be amended. It is then sent (through the editorial board of the journal) to the author for revision. In this case, the date of receipt of the manuscript by the editors is considered to be the date of return of the revised manuscript. The article revised by the author is sent for review again.
- Once a manuscript is submitted to the Editor’s Office the Editorial Board shall adopt, at its meeting, a final decision regarding publishing/rejecting the respective articles. The information concerning the articles accepted to be further published shall be displayed at the website after the respective decisions have been made. Motivated explanations must be sent to the authors whose manuscripts got rejections.
- Should an author disagree with the respective reviewer’s opinion, the manuscript, upon approval of the Editorial Board, may be referred for another (additional) review.
- The procedure and timing for each article to be published shall be subject to the volume of the materials submitted and the sections in each particular issue of the Journal.
- The originals of the reviews shall remain on file at the Editor’s Office for a period of five years.
Publishing Ethics
The Editorial Board of Newsletter of North-Caucasus Federal University is dedicated to follow fair practice of publication based on:
- Guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics:
https://publicationethics.org/membership/cope-code-of-conduct - Declaration of the Association of Science Editors and Publishers "Ethics principles of academic publications": http://hfrir.jvolsu.com/index.php/ru/component/attachments/download/1124
- RF Civil Code (Article 70)
- The policy of the journal is based on respect for the personal rights of author and intellectual property rights.
1. ETHICAL PRINCIPLES OF PUBLICATIONS
The Editorial Board of Newsletter of North-Caucasus Federal University journal is responsible for:
- evaluating manuscripts and making decisions based on the principle of justice and fairness without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors;
- elimination of business and political influence on pursuing publication ethics and maintaining high intellectual level of the journal;
- abidance by the principle on freedom of expression as regards the authors, editorial staff and reviewers;
- striving for meeting requirements of readership, modern science and society;
- making decision about publication materials following the spectrum of criteria such as relevance to the journal’s scope and content, topicality, novelty and scientific significance of a submitted manuscript, absence of plagiarism, scientific certainty of research results and completeness of conclusions;
- persistent enhancement of peer-review and editing process; making sure the peer-review process is conducted by competent peer-reviewers in the relevant scientific field;
- deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published with the account of reviewers’ recommendations for acceptance or rejection for a manuscript they receive;
- preventing any pressure on the reviewer with the purpose to obtain approval of the manuscript under review;
- sending reviewers’ observations and recommendations to the author if any revision is required; providing the author of the peer-reviewed article with the opportunity to explicit an authorial research standpoint;
- justification of a final decision on rejection;
- not using information contained in unpublished articles for editor’s research purposes;
- persistent quality enhancement of the journal;
- extending the Editorial Board and the editorial staff by inviting competent scholars;
- accepting all rational measures for ensuring the high quality of publication materials;
- preserving privacy data protection as regards the authors;
- providing confidentiality of the peer-review process and the name of the reviewer
2. ETHICAL PRINCIPLES OF AUTHORSHIP OF SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS
The authors submitting materials to Newsletter of North-Caucasus Federal University journal are responsible for:
- submitting only original manuscripts (the check report in "Antiplagiat” service is to be no less than 75% while the remaining 25% can contain the references to relevant scientific sources, regulatory legal acts, terms and set expressions typical of a certain scientific field, etc.);
- submitting a manuscript edited in accordance to the submission guidelines of the journal;
- avoiding excessive and inconsistent citing of one’s own works (the reference to fragments from published articles and monographs);
- ensuring that textual or graphic information from manuscripts published by the author prior or by other authors is cited ethically. There must be full and prominent disclosure of the original source; otherwise, it is regarded as plagiarism;
- presenting an accurate account of the work performed and original data obtained. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. The authors should not give false information or fabrication results;
- not copying references to sources from the works they are not familiar with directly, the quotations are given in accordance to the submission guidelines of the journal;
- avoiding duplicate or redundant publications (submission of one and the same manuscript to more than one journal). If the submitted manuscript builds on previously published articles, the authors are encouraged to enclose citations If duplication is detected, the authors will be debarred from publishing their papers in the journal in future;
- reasonable use of the works published earlier in the manuscript submitted; avoiding references to one’s own works with the purpose of expanding the manuscript;
- following the ethical standards whilst criticizing and commenting in regard to other authors’ research work;
- enlisting all co-authors of the article and ensuring that no uninvolved persons are included in the author list;
- working with the editorial staff to introduce corrections in a timely manner once the decision to publish the manuscript is made;
- following the norms of copyright: to provide the reference to data, text, scheme, table and figure authorship, etc., copyright materials can be used only with the permission of the owners.
3.ETHICAL PRINCIPLES OF PEER REVIEW PUBLICATIONS
- The Editorial Board guarantees independent, fair and competent peer-review ensuring objective and impassionate assessment of the quality of the manuscript;
- The Editorial Board may reserve the right to reject the manuscript without peer-review assessment in case the check report in «Antiplagiat» service reveals plagiarism and inappropriate amount and incorrect citing, as well as in case of detection of unreasonable and excessive references to one’s own works;
- The Editorial Board sends the manuscripts for peer-review to relevant experts in compliance with the topic of the manuscript;
- Peer-review assessment is sent solely to the author, no indication of reviewer’s name is given;
- The reviewer shall assess the manuscript and express opinions based on factual information and prove decisions adopted;
- The reviewer can provide recommendations to improve the manuscript;
- If the reviewer questions the validity of the manuscript, its quality, topicality, novelty, etc. the author is provided with the opportunity to respond to the observations made;
- The author-reviewer communication is provided by the technical secretary of the journal. The Editorial Board does not disclose reviewer’s personal data.
4. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
To prevent the conflict of interest and, as a consequence, the violation of publication ethics, each party involved in the publishing process is required to comply with the following guidance.
The editor should:
1. appoint another member of the Editorial Board and expert referee in case there is a conflict of interest between the initially appointed reviewer and the manuscript author;
2. consider incoming complaints concerning publication ethics;
3. ensure comprehensive investigation of incorrect citing and plagiarism;
4. avoid using the unpublished manuscript for private research gain;
5. prevent situations, in which authors, reviewers and other relevant parties involved in the production process of scientific works, violate ethics; ensure retraction of fraudulent publications from the scientific environment;
6. ensure confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and avoid handing over the material to the third party, other than reviewers and members of the Editorial Board.
The author should:
1. mention all known and potential sources of the conflict of interest;
2. disclose the employment, institutional affiliations and the source of research funding;
3. disclose relations with production and finance companies which could lead to the conflict of interest.
The reviewer should:
1. inform the Editor-in-Chief about the presence of the conflict of interest (double bindings, competing interests) and recuse himself / herself from reviewing the manuscript.
In case comprehensive investigation reveals the violation of publication ethics of the journal, the Editorial Board takes the following measures:
- to reject the publication of the submitted manuscript;
- to publish a notice on correcting the violation in an upcoming issue of the journal;
- to correct the published material in the form available for the readers and indexing systems;
- to reject further cooperation with the author, reviewer, member of the Editorial Board;
- to remove formally the article’s material from the journal.
Author(s) shall have the right to appeal a decision on violation. All appeals must be submitted in written form to the Editorial Board within 30 days of notification of the decision. The appeal must include a rebuttal of the decision, explaining in detail the author(s) rationale for why the decision was in error.
The Newsletter of North-Caucasus Federal University may publish articles by the Editor-in-Chief, the Executive secretary and members of the editorial board, but there should be no abuse of official position. Manuscripts of journal staff are sent for review only to external experts. To resolve contradictions and conflict situations, only external experts are involved. In the event of a conflict regarding the Editor-in-Chief's manuscript, the final decision on the possibility of publishing the article is made by members of the editorial board.
When publishing articles by members of the editorial board, the Editor-in-Chief, the Executive secretary, the information about the authors’ affiliation with the journal is indicated in the “Conflict of Interest” section.
Founder
- North-Caucasus Federal University
Author fees
Newsletter of North-Caucasus Federal University is free of charge for all the authors.
The journal does not have any Article processing charges.
The journal does not have any Article submission charges.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. 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.
Plagiarism detection
The Editorial Board of Newsletter of North-Caucasus Federal University uses native Russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. The text similarity of more than 20% is considered to be unacceptable. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.
Preprint and postprint Policy
Prior to acceptance and publication in Newsletter of North-Caucasus Federal University, authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.
As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in Newsletter of North-Caucasus Federal University we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.
Articles previously posted by authors on personal or public websites not affiliated with other publishers are eligible for consideration.
Glossary (by SHERPA)
Revenue Sources
The publication of the journal is financed by the funds of the parent organization.
Generative AI policies for journals
These policies have been triggered by the rise of generative AI* and AI-assisted technologies, which are expected to increasingly be used by content creators. These policies aim to provide greater transparency and guidance to authors, reviewers, editors and readers.
For authors
The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in scientific writing
Please note this policy only refers to the writing process, and not to the use of AI tools to analyze and draw insights from data as part of the research process.
Where authors use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, these technologies should only be used to improve readability and language of the work. Applying the technology should be done with human oversight and control and authors should carefully review and edit the result, because AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete or biased. The authors are ultimately responsible and accountable for the contents of the work.
Authors should disclose in their manuscript the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies and a statement will appear in the published work. Declaring the use of these technologies supports transparency and trust between authors, readers, reviewers, editors and contributors and facilitates compliance with the terms of use of the relevant tool or technology.
Authors should not list AI and AI-assisted technologies as an author or co-author, nor cite AI as an author. Authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to and performed by humans. Each (co-) author is accountable for ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved and authorship requires the ability to approve the final version of the work and agree to its submission. Authors are also responsible for ensuring that the work is original, that the stated authors qualify for authorship, and the work does not infringe third party rights, and should familiarize themselves with our Ethics policy before they submit.
The use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools in figures, images and artwork
We do not permit the use of Generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create or alter images in submitted manuscripts. This may include enhancing, obscuring, moving, removing, or introducing a specific feature within an image or figure. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if and as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. Image forensics tools or specialized software might be applied to submitted manuscripts to identify suspected image irregularities.
The only exception is if the use of AI or AI-assisted tools is part of the research design or research methods (such as in AI-assisted imaging approaches to generate or interpret the underlying research data). If this is done, such use must be described in a reproducible manner in the methods section. This should include an explanation of how the AI or AI-assisted tools were used in the image creation or alteration process, and the name of the model or tool, version and extension numbers, and manufacturer. Authors should adhere to the AI software’s specific usage policies and ensure correct content attribution. Where applicable, authors could be asked to provide pre-AI-adjusted versions of images and/or the composite raw images used to create the final submitted versions, for editorial assessment.
The use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools in the production of artwork such as for graphical abstracts is not permitted. The use of generative AI in the production of cover art may in some cases be allowed, if the author obtains prior permission from the journal editor and publisher, can demonstrate that all necessary rights have been cleared for the use of the relevant material, and ensures that there is correct content attribution.
For reviewers
The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the journal peer review process
When a researcher is invited to review another researcher’s paper, the manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Reviewers should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.
This confidentiality requirement extends to the peer review report, as it may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, reviewers should not upload their peer review report into an AI tool, even if it is just for the purpose of improving language and readability.
Reviewing a scientific manuscript implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by reviewers to assist in the scientific review of a paper as the critical thinking and original assessment needed for peer review is outside of the scope of this technology and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The reviewer is responsible and accountable for the content of the review report.
For editors
The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the journal editorial process
A submitted manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Editors should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.
This confidentiality requirement extends to all communication about the manuscript including any notification or decision letters as they may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, editors should not upload their letters into an AI tool, even if it is just for the purpose of improving language and readability.
Managing the editorial evaluation of a scientific manuscript implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by editors to assist in the evaluation or decision-making process of a manuscript as the critical thinking and original assessment needed for this work is outside of the scope of this technology and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The editor is responsible and accountable for the editorial process, the final decision and the communication thereof to the authors. If an editor suspects that an author or a reviewer has violated our AI policies, they should inform the publisher.
*Generative AI is a type of artificial intelligence technology that can produce various types of content including text, imagery, audio and synthetic data. Examples include ChatGPT, NovelAI, Jasper AI, Rytr AI, DALL-E, etc.
