Publication ethics

Journal "Gumilyov Journal of History" does not charge a fee for submission, processing and publication of articles. Publication of articles in our journal is absolutely free of charge.

The ethical requirements of the Gumilyov Journal of History are based on the principles of publication ethics accepted by the international community, reflected, in particular, in the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics COPE and the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK) of Elsevier.

The Editorial Board and the International Advisory Board of the Journal strictly adhere to ethical standards in their own activities and in their relations with all participants of the publication process: authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, distributors and readers. The following is a list of ethical standards to be followed by authors, reviewers and editors involved in the publication of research results.

We draw your attention to the basic principles of professional ethics:

Ethics of authors of scientific publications

  1. The authors guarantee that the manuscript submitted for publication in the Gumilyov Journal of History is an original manuscript written in one of the languages of the journal.
  2. Authors should not submit to the journal an article that has been sent to another journal and is under review, nor should they submit an article that has already been published in another journal. Submitting an article to more than one journal at the same time is unethical behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript simultaneously to another journal (journals) is perceived as unethical behavior and provides grounds for withdrawal of the article from consideration. Confirmation that the material has not been previously published and is not under consideration in another journal is recorded in the agreement with the author;
  3. Excessive borrowing, as well as plagiarism in any form, including unattributed quotations, paraphrasing, or appropriating the rights to the results of others' research, is unethical and unacceptable;
  4. The author (or team of authors) realizes that he/she bears initial responsibility for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research.
  5. The authors of the article must present reliable results of the conducted research. Plausibly erroneous or falsified statements are unacceptable.
  6. Authors are obliged to indicate in the submitted manuscript the fact of using AI tools, disclose and justify the purpose of application in the manuscript, which according to the Gumilyov Journal of History policy will be included in the published article to ensure transparency and build trust between all participants in the publication process. The final decision on the validity of the application of generative artificial intelligence is made by the editorial board based on the recommendations of the reviewers
  7. Authors should disclose the sources of funding for the study (agreement with the author), to prevent possible conflicts;
  8. Authors are responsible for obtaining all necessary permissions to publish the materials used in the article. Confirmation of the rights to use materials for publication is fixed in the agreement with the author;
  9. The authors ensure that the list of co-authors includes only individuals who have made significant contributions to the study. The final version of the article and its submission for publication must be approved by all co-authors;
  10. The list of authors of the manuscript includes all individuals who made significant contributions to the implementation of the study and interpretation of the data obtained.
  11. If the author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the article at the review stage or after its publication, he or she should notify the journal's editorial board as soon as possible and take joint action to correct them or withdraw the work;
  12. We urge all authors to observe scientific correctness in papers containing criticism of colleagues. Otherwise, the editorial board reserves the right to reject the material or correct its style in agreement with the author.
  13. In the process of reviewing the manuscript, the author is obliged to cooperate with the Editorial Board of the journal, promptly respond to comments and take into account the recommendations of the reviewer. In case of disagreement with the reviewer's assessment, the author sends reasoned objections to the editor. Elimination of remarks and implementation of the reviewer's recommendations should made within a month from the moment of sending the text of the review to the author;
  14. If case of republished, the author should not violate the rights of the Gumilyov Journal of History by indicating the place of the first publication of the material;

Ethics of peer review of scientific publications

  • - The Editorial Board ensures confidentiality of the review process and informs reviewers about the need to strictly follow the ethical principles of reviewing papers. The review process of submitted materials is confidential. Unpublished materials cannot be used by the Editorial Board, editors or reviewers in their own interests;
  • - The review process is objective, independent of commercial interests and opportunistic needs. The priority is the scientific value of the research, its content and novelty, compliance with the requirements of scientific ethics;
  • - Reviewing is carried out anonymously. The reviewer is sent the manuscript without the author's name. In case of negative review, its text is provided to the author of the manuscript, without signature and indication of the reviewer's name, position, place of work. Violation of anonymity is possible only in case of reviewer's statement about unreliability or falsification of materials presented in the manuscript, or the presence of plagiarism.
  • - The reviewer is obliged to provide an objective, reasoned, substantiated assessment of the materials and research results submitted for publication. Personal criticism of the author is not allowed;
  • - As a conclusion, the reviewer fills in the review form, which reflects the criteria for evaluation of the manuscript. The final part of the review contains the overall evaluation of the manuscript, comments and recommendations;
  • - A reviewer who, in his/her opinion, is not qualified to evaluate the manuscript or cannot be objective, must inform the editor;
  • - After receiving a positive review of the submitted manuscript, the final decision on the feasibility of publication is made by the editorial board.

Ethics of publishing scientific articles

  1. The Editorial Board of a scientific journal accepts manuscripts for consideration in accordance with the journal's focus;
  2. The main criteria for acceptance or rejection of a manuscript by the Editorial Board are the relevance and scientific significance of the submitted article, its compliance with the subject of the journal, originality of the article and reliability of the data, clarity of presentation of the material, compliance of the article with all the requirements of the journal;
  3. The Editorial Board agrees to take reasonable measures to identify and prevent the publication of articles in the research of which inappropriate behavior has been committed has occurred, not to encourage such violation or knowingly allow such violations;
  4. The Editorial Board guarantees to make decisions without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, nationality, social status or political preferences of the authors;
  5. The magazine does not print material that may be considered stolen;
  6. The Editorial Board guarantees complete confidentiality in the process of accepting, processing and review of the article. Unpublished materials may not be use or shared with third parties other than reviewers and editorial staff;
  7. The Editorial Board is obliged to protect the integrity of published manuscripts, to agree with the author on edits, changes or reduction of the text;
  8. The Editorial Board guarantees the consideration of claims regarding the reviewed manuscripts or published materials. If a conflict situation is identified, the necessary measures will be taken to restore the violated rights;
  9. The Editorial Board, together with the publisher, guarantees the recognition of errors, upon identification of which corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies will be published (Instructions for withdrawal or correction of articles);
  10. The opinion of the editors are not necessarily those of the authors of the published materials.

Policy on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI)

The editors of the Gumilyov Journal of History recognize and support the development of new intelligent technologies in research and development, and the use of tools to improve productivity. The Journal closely observes and records new AI advances in the publishing field. An increasing number of authors are using AI to write scholarly publications, essentially blurring the boundaries between human-generated and machine-generated text, calling into question the content of the Journal's authorship policy.

Authors are required to indicate in the submitted manuscript the fact of using AI tools, disclose and justify the purpose of application in the manuscript, which according of the JGumilyov Journal of History policy will be included in the published article to ensure transparency and build trust between all participants in the publication process. The final decision on the validity of the application of generative artificial intelligence is made by the editorial board based on the recommendations of the reviewers. At the same time, the editorial board emphasizes that it is not allowed to include in the co-authorship of work the names of information systems used in the preparation of the manuscript, including ChatGPT.

Quality control of reviewing

In individual cases, the editorial board may send an article for additional review, including statistical and methodological review. The Editorial Board of the journal conducts an ongoing assessment of the quality of reviewing.

The Editorial Board of the journal expect that the peer review process will help to:

  • - prevent the publication of poor quality articles and weed out studies that were not properly designed and executed;
  • - make sure that the data presented in the article are correct and sufficiently summarised;
  • - check whether the article contains references to previous major works in its field;
  • - make sure that the author's interpretation of the data obtained and the validity of the conclusions are correct;
  • - and, on this basis, decide on the publication of the article and give the authors with recommendations for its improvement (where necessary).

Policy on Advertising

The Editorial Board adheres to ethical standards in its activities and above all upholds the right to editorial independence. Placement of advertising and sponsorship cannot influence in any way editorial decisions regarding the selection of materials for publication and editorial content. The magazine does not publish material to accompany advertisement and does not sell advertising in relation to specific articles. Advertising and informational materials published in the magazine are not mixed with editorial content.

All decisions on the placement of advertising materials are made solely by the Publisher.

The Editorial Board reserves the right not to accept advertising and informational materials, the placement of which does not comply with the publication’s policy.