The journal “Law: History and Modernity” in its editorial policy follows the principles of integrity of publications in scientific journals, corresponding to the provisions of authoritative international associations (COPE, CSE, DOAJ, etc.), the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (ANRI), which establish standards of ethical conduct for all parties involved in the publication (Authors, Journal Editors, Reviewers, Publishers and the scientific community), requiring compliance with these rules from all participants in the publishing process.

The journal “Law: History and Modernity” also accepts and takes into account the experience of journals of leading international publishers of scientific literature (Elsevier, Springer, MDPI  etc.).

Through comprehensive, objective, and fair peer review, the journal strives to select only the highest quality research materials for publication.

The editors of the journal Law: History and Modernity believe in the academic integrity and responsibility of all participants in scientific research.

 

 

 

Ethical principles in the author's activities

 

Authorship of the publication

 

The authors of the publication can only be those persons who made a significant contribution to the formation of the concept of the work, the development, execution and/or interpretation of the results of the presented research, as well as to the process of writing the manuscript (including those who carried out scientific and stylistic editing and design in accordance with the requirements of the journal).

Co-authorship. Authorship must be based on the actual contribution of each member of the team of authors. All Authors must have made significant scientific contributions to the research and must agree with the presentation of the results and conclusions of the work.

Where research participants have made significant contributions in a particular area of ​​the research project, they should be listed as significant contributors to that research.

The generally accepted criteria for authorship are:

1) significant contribution to the concept and design of the study or acquisition and analysis of data and their interpretation;

2) writing the first draft of the article or significantly revising its important intellectual content;

3) final approval of the version of the article for publication;

4) Agreement to be responsible for all aspects of the work and to ensure that issues related to the accuracy and integrity of all parts of the work are appropriately reviewed and resolved.

These criteria are basic and should be considered individually for each study, taking into account its specifics. These criteria should not be used as a means of manipulation and exclusion of a scientist who has made a significant contribution to the research (for example, compliance with point 1 while being excluded from the opportunity to work under points 2 and 3). The decision to include a particular Author should be made exclusively by the team of authors. Position, age, gender, race, religious beliefs should not influence the determination of the Authors of the article. Influence on the decision to include organizational leaders, sponsors and other persons among the Authors is unacceptable. Thus, authorship models need to be flexible for different types of research.

The decision on the order of the Authors should be made solely by the team of authors. As a rule, this order is determined by the contribution of each scientist to the research conducted.

If agreement cannot be reached on who qualifies as an Author and on the order of Authors, the dispute should be resolved by the institution where the work was performed or by colleagues who have no conflict of interest with any of the co-authors. The participation of the Journal Editor in resolving this issue is excluded.

First author. The first author on the list of co-authors should be the head of the manuscript's team of authors, who took the greatest part in the process of preparing the text and is familiar with the entire process of conducting scientific work. The head of the team of authors should also be a “corresponding author” - to communicate with the editors of the journal and readers (after publication of the article).

Co-authors may be those who made a significant contribution to the preparation of the manuscript text and the research conducted. Where research participants have made significant contributions in a particular area of ​​the research project, they should be listed as significant contributors to that research.

The first author (corresponding author) must ensure that all participants who made significant contributions to the study are listed as Co-Authors and that those who did not participate in the study are not listed as Co-Authors, and that all Co-Authors have seen and approved the final version of the work and agree to its submission for publication.

Selling co-authorship, gift co-authorship, invisible authorship are not only a violation of ethical standards, but can be defined as fraud. The editors promote the practice of responsible authorship, and therefore recommend providing information about the specific contribution of each Author to the content of the article.

Making changes to the list of authors or changing the order of mentioning the Authors after submitting the manuscript is possible only if a statement of consent is sent from all the Authors listed in the list to the requested change, as well as from the Author whose name should be removed or added. The application must contain a detailed and justified explanation of the changes being made.

The names of persons who made contributions to the preparation of the manuscript that are not sufficient for recognition of authorship, with their consent, are given in the “Acknowledgments” section indicating their contribution to the work (for example, scientific advice, data collection, administrative support, technical editing, linguistic editing and proofreading, etc.).

Corresponding author. Identification of the Author responsible for the correspondence is mandatory. The author corresponding with the editors must obtain permission to transfer the article and materials to it from other co-authors. He ensures that all co-authors are familiar with the latest version of the article submitted for review to the editor, and all persons who made a significant contribution to the study are included in the co-authorship or are listed in the acknowledgments. The corresponding author notifies his co-authors of all changes and proposals from the editorial board of the journal and does not make decisions regarding the article alone and without the written consent of all co-authors. Authors are required to participate in the review process, including responding to all the Reviewer’s comments, agreeing with them or arguing a point of view different from the Reviewer’s. The editors may request additional information from the corresponding Author, as well as send requests to all co-authors at the specified email addresses.

The editors do not recommend using intermediary agencies, since the reputation of such a selected company may not correspond to the ethical principles of the magazine.

 

Objectivity and reliability

 

The author guarantees that the article and materials for it are original, not previously published in Russian or other languages.

The authors undertake not to publish the submitted text until it is published in the Journal “Law: History and Modernity”. When subsequently published in other publications, they provide a link to the journal indicating its email address.

Republication of materials, including those previously published in another language, is unacceptable without appropriate notification to the editors and provision of copies of such works. The practice of duplicate publication of the same manuscript in different languages ​​is unacceptable. The results of the study are presented in the context of previous studies by other scientists. The review of the conducted studies is as complete and reliable as possible and reflects information regardless of whether it corresponds to the Author’s hypothesis.

The authors are responsible for the accuracy of the facts and data presented in the article, proper names, geographical names and other information. If errors and inaccuracies are discovered, the Author must notify the editors about them and cooperate with them in order to eliminate errors and inaccuracies.

The author guarantees that the study was conducted in accordance with ethical and legal standards. Possible conflicts of interest are presented to the editorial board of the journal, and all sources of funding are indicated.

The author guarantees that the article contains all the data about the research conducted, i.e. The author avoids unjustified division of the article into parts (salami slicing) in order to increase the number of published works. The manuscript contains sufficient data and bibliographic references for possible reproduction. The method and protocols are described so that another researcher can reproduce it in their own studies.

The author guarantees that the data and their interpretation presented in the article are complete and reliable. Deliberate concealment of data that may affect the results of the study, falsification of data (including manipulation of images) are absent in the article. Deliberately erroneous statements, selective or ambiguous presentation of facts, or deliberate selection of research methods to support a particular conclusion are unacceptable.

Authors must notify the editors of any errors found in the study at all stages of its publication, including in the published work.

 

Acknowledgment of primary sources, plagiarism and citation

 

Authors must provide reliable results of the work done, as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the study. The data underlying the work must be presented accurately. The work must contain sufficient detail and bibliographical references for possible reproduction. False or obviously erroneous statements are perceived as unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Recognition of the contributions of others is mandatory, therefore, for any material (fragments of text, tables, figures, photographs, etc.) that the Author borrows from other works, the original source must be indicated. The authors guarantee that the work presented is completely original; When using works, statements, ideas of other authors, appropriate bibliographic references are provided. Plagiarism in all its forms is unacceptable. Any technical techniques that artificially increase the uniqueness of the text are unacceptable and are a gross violation of ethical standards.

Reviews (including systematic reviews) must also be accurate and objective.

Authors should cite publications that are relevant to the work presented, preferably citing the original source rather than review articles. When performing a literature review, Authors must evaluate the scientific content of the work, and not the indicators of publication activity of the journal or a specific author. Any form of citation manipulation is unacceptable.

It is unacceptable to use data without written permission from the original source if it was obtained privately: during correspondence, conversation, discussion. It is unacceptable to use data obtained from confidential sources without the written permission of the Authors of the work.

Authors of manuscripts must submit entirely original work. Mentions of the results of the work of other authors must be accompanied by links to the relevant primary sources (which are subject to inclusion in the list of references). Quoting a text previously published somewhere must be formatted as direct speech (the text must be enclosed in quotation marks and written in italics) with the obligatory indication of the original source. The inclusion of large fragments of borrowed text in the manuscript is unacceptable.

Manuscripts sent to our journal for publication undergo a mandatory check for text plagiarism through the Anti-Plagiarism system.

If the Editorial Board has grounds for a more detailed check, additional tools may be used to search for borrowings.

The Editors of the Journal strongly discourage the use of any technical techniques that can increase the score of the text in the Anti-Plagiarism system.

Identification of plagiarism of ideas and plagiarism of data is carried out within the framework of scientific review, as well as after the publication of manuscripts - upon the fact that readers have submitted relevant statements. If the fact of unauthorized borrowing of data (results of scientific work) or ideas is established, the manuscript (article) will be retracted and rejected from publication, even if it has already been published.

 

Access to source data and their storage

 

The reproducibility of scientific research is integral to its integrity, credibility, and value to the scientific community. Authors are encouraged to openly deposit the original data, i.e. provide access to  complete experimental data sets so that the results can be reproduced. The data availability statement should provide details of where the data supporting the reported results can be found and include links to publicly available data archives. Any ethical and legal restrictions must be clearly stated in the data availability statement at the time of submission. If data is not publicly available, it may be requested to be presented to editors or reviewers. Authors are encouraged to retain these data for an adequate period of time after publication.

The editors reserve the right to request from the Authors original (raw) research data related to the manuscript, including for provision to Reviewers and Editors. Authors must be prepared to provide this type of information to the Editorial staff, as well as retain this data for an adequate period of time after publication.

 

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

 

All Authors are required to disclose (declare in the appropriate section of the manuscript) financial or other obvious or potential conflicts of interest that may be perceived as influencing the results or conclusions presented in the work.

Examples of potential conflicts of interest that must be disclosed:

receipt of financial remuneration for participating in a study or writing a manuscript, any connection (work under a contract, consulting, having shareholding, receiving fees, providing expert opinions) with organizations that have a direct interest in the subject of the study or review;

patent application or registration of a patent for research results (copyright, etc.);

obtaining financial support for any stage of conducting research or writing a manuscript (including grants and other financial support).

Obvious and potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed as early as possible.

Information about conflicts of interest received from the Authors of manuscripts is not provided to Reviewers and is available only to the Editorial Board when making a decision on publication of the manuscript. Also, information about conflicts of interest is published as part of the full text of the article.

 

 

 

Ethical principles in the activities of a reviewer

Responsibility

 

The peer review process is a contribution to ensuring the objectivity of research, the integrity of its presentation when published, and the development of scientific knowledge in general. The reviewer must understand that he is part of the scientific community and that he himself needs a high-quality assessment of his work, therefore he must approach the review process responsibly and conscientiously.

 

Contribution to editorial decisions

 

Reviewing is an important part of reviewing a manuscript. The Reviewer's opinion helps the Editor-in-Chief make a decision on publication. The author, in turn, taking into account the Reviewer’s comments, can significantly improve the quality of his work. The reviewer must provide accurate and professional information about his knowledge and experience. Lack of qualifications of the Reviewer in any issue discussed in the manuscript is a reason for refusal to review. If the Reviewer is able to evaluate a specific part of the manuscript, they should clearly describe the scope of their knowledge in that particular area.

 

Performance

 

The reviewer must promptly respond to the invitation to write a review, especially if he refuses. The reviewer must complete the review within the proposed or mutually agreed upon time frame, and must notify the Editor if additional review time is needed. The reviewer must comply with ethical requirements in the field of reviewing, as well as follow the journal's policy in the field of reviewing. If a Reviewer does not agree with the journal's review policy (for example, the type of review accepted), this is grounds for refusal to review.

Any selected Reviewer who does not feel qualified to review a manuscript or does not have sufficient time to complete the work quickly must notify the Editor of Law: History and Contemporary and request to be excluded from the review process of the relevant manuscript.

 

Confidentiality

 

Any manuscript received for review should be treated as confidential. This work must not be opened or discussed with any persons not authorized to do so by the Editor.

Reviews are conducted confidentially. Reviewers are informed that the manuscripts sent to them are the intellectual property of the Authors and relate to information not subject to disclosure. Manuscripts cannot be shown or discussed with other persons except those authorized by the editors. It is unethical to agree to review a manuscript without the intention of writing a review, but with the goal of familiarizing yourself with its content.

 

Standards of Objectivity

 

The expert opinion must be objective, specific and based on the quality of the work itself. Reviewers must clearly express their point of view, supporting it with appropriate arguments. The review should contain constructive comments that will help the Authors improve their work. Reviewers should point out additional work that could expand the study but has not been reviewed or considered by the Author. Unreasonable recommendations to include in the publication references to the works of the Reviewer (or his colleagues) in order to increase citations are unacceptable. Personal criticism of the Author(s) and unfounded accusations are unacceptable. The influence of personal, financial and other circumstances, as well as intellectual preferences, is unacceptable. Race, gender, citizenship, religious and other beliefs cannot influence the Reviewer's decision.

Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts if there are conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative or other interactions or relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations associated with the submitted work.

 

Unfair behavior

 

Any statement previously published must contain a link to the original source. The editors expect that primary sources will be indicated not only when directly quoting, but also in the case of other types of integration of materials from other studies into the work. Reviewers should bring to the attention of the Editor any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge. Reviewers are required to immediately notify the Editor if illegal borrowings (including self-plagiarism), errors in work, signs of data falsification and other facts of dishonest and unethical behavior of the Authors of the study are detected.

 

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

 

Reviewers are required to declare all possible conflicts of interest (personal, professional, financial and other relationships and interests, including competing relationships with the Author of the study; participation in a joint research project; scientific supervision) and contact the Editor if they are not sure whether a certain situation contains a conflict of interest or not. Reviewers are required to contact the Editor if, after preparing their review, they become aware of facts that could indicate a possible conflict of interest, as well as influence their initial opinion and recommendations.

It is unacceptable to use unpublished data obtained from a manuscript submitted for consideration in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained through peer review related to possible competitive advantages must remain confidential and may not be used for personal gain.

 

Influence on the decisions of the Editorial Board

 

Reviewing helps the Editor make decisions about publication and, through appropriate interaction with Authors, can also help the Author improve the quality of the work. Peer review is an essential part of formal scientific communication and is at the core of the scientific approach. The publisher shares the view that all scientists who wish to contribute to a publication are required to undertake the substantive work of reviewing the manuscript.

 

 

 

Ethical principles in the activities of the editor and editorial board

 

Publication decision

 

The journal editor is responsible for deciding on the publication of articles submitted to the journal at all stages of the editorial and publishing cycle, including after publication. When making a decision, the Editor is guided by the editorial policy of the Journal “Law: History and Modernity,” as well as ethical standards and current legal requirements.

The manuscript may be rejected by the Editor at the stage preceding review if there is a good reason for this (the subject of the article does not correspond to the subject of the journal; the article is obviously of low scientific quality; the article was previously published in another publication; a fundamental contradiction of the ethical principles adhered to by the Journal is revealed in the submitted materials). The editor accepts an article for publication in accordance with his conviction that it meets the requirements of the journal. Editors must ensure that the materials they publish comply with international standards of scientific and publication ethics.

The editor makes the final decision on publication after studying the opinions of the Editorial Board and Reviewers. The decision to publish should be based on the significance of the article, its originality, and proximity to the topic of the journal. Papers that report only negative results from a study and also challenge previous work published in the journal may also be submitted for publication.

All incoming manuscripts that are not rejected for the above reasons at the first stage of consideration are submitted by the Editor for review, selecting Reviewers from among the most competent specialists on the subject of the article.

Editors must guarantee the high quality of materials published in the journal and their substantive integrity, as well as publish corrections, clarifications, and apologies in cases where such a need arises.

 

Honesty and openness

 

The editor must maintain high standards of honesty and integrity in academic publications. The editor must improve the publication's editorial policy in the field of ethics, including taking into account updating cases and standards of international organizations.

The Editor should strive to ensure a fair and appropriate review process, including ensuring the effective selection of Reviewers for articles, as well as the wishes of the Authors that a specific person should not review their work due to these circumstances. The review process should be clear and transparent, and regularly updated in order to improve the quality of peer review in the journal.

The editor must ensure the publication of complete requirements for the Authors of articles, which also includes a transparent procedure for their evaluation, indicating the timing of the editorial cycle and possible reasons for the rejection of manuscripts.

The editor must ensure that the reader is informed as fully as possible about the published research, including potential conflicts of interest, funding, and other information that may influence the reader's final conclusions about the research.

An editor should not take inappropriate actions to influence the ranking of his journal by artificially increasing its performance.

 

Responsibility and control

 

Financial, personal or other interests should not influence the decision to publish. If there is a potential conflict of interest, the editor is obliged to exclude any forms of his participation in the examination and evaluation of the manuscript.

The editor must ensure the existence and regular review of policies to resolve editorial conflicts of interest, as well as actions in case of dishonest behavior of authors, reviewers and other persons participating in the publication.

If errors are detected in articles or facts of unethical behavior of authors or reviewers, the editor is obliged to take appropriate measures, including publishing amendments to the article, doubts about the article, corrections, apologies, refutations, or retracting the article. In his actions, the editor must be guided by the rules of COPE and the Council of Ethics for Scientific Publications of ANRI. Information about retracting an article should be submitted to the Scientific Publication Ethics Board and indexing scientific databases.

 

Confidentiality

 

The editor and editorial board of the journal must not disclose information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than members of the team of authors, reviewers, possible reviewers and the publisher. Unpublished data, ideas and other information obtained from submitted manuscripts and associated with possible benefits may not be used for personal research or other personal purposes without the written consent of the author.

The editor must maintain and create all conditions for maintaining the anonymity of reviewers.

 

Interaction

 

The editor ensures control over the work and interaction of all participants in the editorial and publishing cycle, indexing scientific databases, other publications and organizations in order to comply with ethical requirements and increase the integrity of scientific publications of the Journal “Law: History and Modernity”.

If there is suspicion of dishonest behavior of authors, reviewers and other persons participating in the publication, the editor must ensure that an investigation is carried out.

The editor must ensure the adoption and publication of a transparent procedure for the interaction of authors with the editor, editorial board, and reviewers at all stages of the publication cycle.

The editor is obliged to ensure a meeting of the editorial board, as well as consultations with members of the editorial board, including information about their functions, duties, and responsibilities.

The editor is obliged to regularly exchange information with the publisher and carry out joint work to protect copyright. When interacting with the publisher, the editor is obliged to maintain the principle of editorial independence.

 

Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest

 

Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained during the review process related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

Editors should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts (namely, request a Co-Editor, Associate Editor, or collaborate with other members of the Editorial Board in reviewing the work instead of personally reviewing and making a decision) if there are conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other interactions and relationships with the Authors, companies, and possibly other organizations associated with the manuscript.

If there is a conflict of interest between the Editor and the Author of the article, the article must be transferred to another Editor.

The editor must ensure that the reader is informed as fully as possible about the published research, including potential conflicts of interest, funding, and other information that may influence the reader's final conclusions about the research.

 

Publication supervision

 

An editor who has provided convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions presented in a publication are erroneous must report this to the Publisher (and/or the relevant Scientific Society) for prompt notice of changes, withdrawals, expressions of concern, and other appropriate statements.

Financial, personal or other interests should not influence the decision to publish. If there is a potential conflict of interest, the Editor is obliged to exclude any forms of his participation in the examination and evaluation of the manuscript.

The editor must ensure the existence and regular review of policies to resolve editorial conflicts of interest, as well as actions in case of dishonest behavior of Authors, Reviewers and other persons participating in the publication.

If errors are detected in articles or facts of unethical behavior of Authors or Reviewers, the Editor is obliged to take appropriate measures, including publishing amendments to the article, doubts about the article, corrections, apologies, refutations, or retracting the article. In his actions, the Editor must be guided by the rules of COPE and the Council of Ethics for Scientific Publications of ANRI. Information about the retraction of an article should be transmitted to the Council on the Ethics of Scientific Publications and indexing scientific databases.

 

Engagement and collaboration within research

 

The Editor, together with the Publisher (or the Scientific Society), takes adequate response measures in the event of ethical claims relating to reviewed manuscripts or published materials. Such measures generally include interaction with the Authors of the manuscript and the argumentation of the relevant complaint or demand, but may also involve interaction with relevant organizations and research centers.

 

Ethical principles in the activities of a publisher

 

The publisher must comply with international standards of ethics for scientific publications and follow principles that facilitate the fulfillment of ethical responsibilities by editors and the editorial board, authors, and reviewers.

The publisher must follow the principle of editorial independence and create conditions for its implementation. Financial, personal and other interests should not influence the decisions made by the publisher and the relationship with the journal editor, authors and other participants in the publishing process.

The publisher must respect the right to confidentiality and secrecy of personal information (of authors, reviewers and other participants in the publication process).

The publisher must promote the protection of intellectual property and copyright.

The publisher must promote the integrity and transparency of each published article, including with regard to conflicts of interest, funding of publications and research, and ethics of publications and research.

In cases of alleged violation of the principles of ethical publications, the publisher, in close cooperation with the editors, must take all necessary measures to clarify the situation.

The publisher has a responsibility to support the journal editor in addressing ethical concerns and to assist in communicating with others involved in the publishing process, other journals, and/or publishers where this facilitates the proper performance of the editor's responsibilities.

The publisher has a responsibility to assist parties responsible for investigating misconduct in research and publication practices and to help resolve these issues within the scope of their authority.

The publisher must provide, if necessary, appropriate specialized legal support (opinion or advice).

The publisher must ensure the timely publication of journal editions, as well as the publication of amendments to the article, doubts about the article, corrections, apologies, refutations, or retraction of unfair articles.

 

Conflict of interest

By conflict of interest, the editors of the journal “Law: History and Modernity” understand any relationship or area of ​​interest that could directly or indirectly affect the results of your work, reviews or make them biased. Conflicts of interest typically accompany many studies, and the fact that they exist is not unethical or a sufficient reason to reject your work. Our journal's policy is to ensure the independence and integrity of the data presented, so it is important and mandatory for us to obtain all information about possible conflicts of interest so that we can make an objective decision about publishing your work or considering your peer review. It is important for us to provide our readers with the opportunity to form their own opinion about the article, having all the data for this.

Conflicts of interest may arise at all stages and between all participants in the research and editorial and publishing cycle:
- financial relations with the organization that sponsors the research or is the manufacturer of the product that becomes the subject of the research;
- labor relations, when the author is an employee or member of an organization that is interested in obtaining certain results of the research being conducted;
- personal relationships that can influence the formation of objective research results.

For example, the distribution of conflicts of interest might look like this:
- authors: specified financial, labor, personal and other relationships;
- co-authors: in addition to those indicated - inconsistent personal relationships within the team of authors;
- reviewers: in addition to those indicated, competing relationships with the author of the study, which may cause negative feedback on the manuscript under review; family, friendly and other relationships that may cause undeserved positive feedback;
- editors and publishers: in addition to those indicated - sponsorship and other mutually beneficial relationships with authors or affiliated organizations that may influence the objective decision on publication of the manuscript.

Please note that the presence of a possible conflict of interest does not mean that you acted in bad faith when performing research or reviewing it. In order to create conditions for an objective assessment of your work and compliance with the ethical principles of scientific publications, you must be guided by the following rules.

For authors:
- all potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed in the appropriate form;
- it is necessary to confirm the absence of a conflict of interest within the team of authors in the appropriate form;
- it is necessary to indicate all sources of funding for the study in the appropriate section of the manuscript (“Funding”);
- when submitting a manuscript, indicate colleagues with whom the author has a conflict of interest in order to exclude them from the list of potential reviewers.

For reviewers:
- refuse to review in cases provided for by the Regulations on Reviewing. The ban on reviewing applies to:
- employees of the organization with which the author is affiliated;
- students and scientific supervisors of the author;
- co-authors of other works of the author;
- participants in a joint research project(s) with the author;
- other persons who are in a competitive, scientific, financial or any other relationship with the authors of the article.

For editors and members of the editorial board:
- if there is a potential conflict of interest, notify the editor-in-chief (deputy editor-in-chief) and the editorial board about this in order to ensure an unbiased decision on the publication of the manuscript;
- when considering a manuscript of a member of the editorial board, exclude any forms of his participation in the examination and evaluation of his own manuscript.

For publishers:
- ensure the right of editorial independence and not influence the decision to publish the manuscript.

The information for this section was prepared based on materials from the publishing houses Springer, Pleiades, as well as methodological materials of the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers.