Social Evolution & History

(based on Elsevier recommendations and using the Publishing ethics resource kit)

Ethical guidelines for journal publication

The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed Journal of Globalization Studies is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society of society-owned.

Uchitel Publishers = Izdatel'stvo Uchitel (Издательство «Учитель») as publisher of the Journal of Globalization Studies takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities.

We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.

Duties of editors

Publication decisions

The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.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. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern. It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the main journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations. Non-peer reviewed sections of their journal should be clearly identified.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the

publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Duties of authors

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. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion' works should be clearly identified as such.

Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.

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. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

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. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

• Each author’s full name, degree, affiliation, email, and mailing address.
• The indicated corresponding author (who will receive proofs of the article via email.)
• A one-paragraph abstract of 150-200 words.
• 3-8 keywords.

Article Content

• Manuscripts should be submitted as DOCX (Word) or RTF
• All manuscripts must be written in clear and concise English.
• Articles should generally be no longer than 8000 words, review articles should not exceed 2500 words, and brief reviews should be no longer than 600 words.
• The text of submission should be single space text in 10- or 12-point type, with 1-inch margins.
• Bibliographical references should be given in parentheses in standard author-date form in the body of the text: (Lee and Devore 1968: 236). A complete list of references cited, arranged alphabetically by author's surname, should be typed at the end of the article along the following lines:

Books:

Brecher, J., Costello, T., and Smith, B. 2000. Globalization from Below: The Power of Solidarity. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.

Edited volumes:

Schaebler, B., and Stenberg, L. (eds.) 2004. Globalization and the Muslim World: Culture, Religion, and Modernity. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

Journal article

Thomson, J. E. 1995. State Sovereignty in International Relations: Bridging the Gap between Theory and Empirical Research. International Studies Quarterly 39(2): 213–233.

Chapter in a book

Slaughter, A. M. 2000. Governing the Global Economy through Government Networks. In Byers, M. (ed.), The Role of Law in International Politics (pp. 177–205). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

• Quotations. Single inverted commas should be used except for quotations within quotations, which should have double inverted commas. Quotations of more than about 45 words should be set off from the text with an extra line of space above and below, and typed without inverted commas.
• Figures and Tables.

• Please, do not embed figures in MS Word documents.
• Figures will appear black-and-white in print. For this reason, you are advised to avoid the use of colors in situations where their translation to black and white would render the material illegible or incomprehensible.
• Submit each figure as a separate file with high-resolution figures (minimum resolution of 300 dpi) in JPEG, TIF, EPS, PSD, or PDF format.
• Number figures, tables, boxes, and videos consecutively and mention each in the text (e.g., see Table 1).
• Label each part of multi-part figures, using uppercase letters A, B, C, etc.
• Include a legend for every figure and a title for every table and box.
• Provide a full citation and credit line if using borrowed material, and obtain permission from the original source.
• Set credit lines as follows:

• Figures/Tables with published data: “Data from [source citation]” (does not require permission).
• Previously published materials: “From [source citation]; with permission” (requires permission).
• Previously published materials that you have altered: “Adapted from [source citation]; with permission” (may require permission).

• Emphasized text, titles, and foreign terms

• To indicate text you wish to emphasize, use italics rather than underlining. The use of color to emphasize text is discouraged.
• Foreign terms should be set in italics rather than underlined.
• Titles of books, movies, etc., should be set in italics rather than underlined.

• Headings Headings (e.g., title of sections) should be distinguished from the main body text: Clearly indicate the heading hierarchy. Be consistent in whether or not you use headline case, or you capitalize the first word and leave the rest in lower-case.

Permissions

• It is the authors’ responsibility to obtain permission to reproduce original or modified material that has been previously published.
• In the case of third-party material that may not need permission, such as open-access or public domain, the source must still be correctly identified. If you did not create it, we need to know where it came from.

Please note

• Before submitting your article please have a look at our Publication Ethics Statement [ЕЕ1] and our copyright agreement [ЕЕ2]

• All new submissions are screened for completeness and adherence to the Guide for Authors. Those that pass are then assigned to a Senior Editor for consideration for sending for peer review. To save time for authors and peer-reviewers, only those papers that seem most likely to meet our editorial criteria are sent for formal review. Those papers judged by the editors to be of insufficient general interest or otherwise inappropriate are rejected promptly without external review (although these decisions may be based on informal advice from specialists in the field).

The peer-review procedure of the submitted articles

1. All submitted manuscripts are read by the editorial staff.
2. Manuscripts judged to be of potential interest to our readership are sent for formal review. We do not release referees' identities to authors or to other reviewers unless a referee voluntarily signs their comments to the authors. Our preference is for referees to remain anonymous throughout the review process and beyond.
3. Typically the manuscript will be reviewed within 90 days. Should the reviewers' reports contradict one another or a report is unduly delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. If necessary, revised manuscripts may be returned to the initial reviewers, usually within 1 month. Reviewers and Senior Editors may request more than one revision of a manuscript, and alternative reviewers may also be invited to review the manuscript at any time.

Duties of reviewers

• Contribution to editorial decisions

The aim of peer review process is to help the editor in making editorial decisions and also assist the author in improving the paper through the editorial communications with the author. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Uchitel Publishers (Издательство «Учитель») shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

• Promptness

Any selected referee who feels 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.

• Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

• Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

• 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.

• 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.

The final decision

The Senior Editor is responsible for the decision to reject or recommend the manuscript for publication. This decision will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees.

Reviews are stored in the publishing and editorial office for 5 years.

Corresponding author reviews page proof and submits corrections within two weeks.

Manuscript is published online (with six-month embargo on publication of a full text) and in print.

All authors will receive a complimentary copy of the print issue, and the corresponding author will also receive a PDF of the article to share with coauthors.

Please also feel free to distribute the link to the online abstract.