- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Publication Fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
- » Revenue Sources
- » Editorial Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the Journal
Aim and Scope
The aims of the journal are:
- To create a platform for publishing research results in the fields of economics, law and sociology;
- To promote scientific and practical cooperation between specialists of various profiles;
- To disseminate innovative ideas and practical developments in these fields of knowledge;
- To form a unified information space for experience exchange between scientists and practitioners.
The objectives of the journal are:
In the field of economics:
- To publish research on current issues of economic development;
- To analyze modern economic processes and trends;
- To present results of applied economic research;
- To develop practical recommendations for economic policy;
In the field of law:
- To cover theoretical and practical issues of jurisprudence;
- To analyze law enforcement practice;
- To investigate problems of improving legislation;
- To develop proposals for optimizing the legal system.
In the field of sociology:
- To present results of sociological research;
- To analyze social processes and phenomena;
- To study public opinion on current issues;
- To develop recommendations for social development.
General objectives:
- To ensure a high scientific level of published materials;
- To support interdisciplinary dialogue;
- To promote professional growth of young scientists;
- To expand international scientific cooperation;
- To implement modern publishing technologies;
- To enhance the journal's authority in the scientific community.
Section Policies
Open SubmissionsPublication Frequency
The journal is published 4 times a year.
The release schedule of the journal «The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology»:
- Issue №1 — released on March 31
Deadline for article submissions: February 25
- Issue №2 — released on June 30
Deadline for article submissions: May 25
- Issue №3 — released on September 30
Deadline for article submissions: August 31
- Issue №4 — released on December 30
Deadline for article submissions: November 15
This schedule ensures regular and timely publication of scientific materials across the journal's thematic areas, providing researchers with consistent opportunities to share their findings throughout the year.
Open Access Policy
This is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediatly 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.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
- Article acceptance criteria. The article is accepted for consideration only if it complies with the requirements for original manuscripts (materials).
- Review process. The editorial board conducts peer review of all submitted materials that correspond to the journal's declared subject areas in order to evaluate them expertly.
- Registration procedure. The article is registered by the secretary in the article registration journal, indicating the date of receipt, title, full name(s) of the author(s), and author's place of employment. The article is assigned a unique registration number.
- Review assignment. The Editor-in-Chief (or Deputy Editor-in-Chief) sends the article for review to a member of the Editorial Board responsible for the relevant field/scientific discipline. If the relevant Editorial Board member is unavailable or if the article is submitted by an Editorial Board member, the Editor-in-Chief sends the article to external reviewers.
- Reviewer requirements. All reviewers must be recognized experts in the field of the reviewed materials. Reviewers must have publications in the field of the reviewed article within the last 3 years.
Important notes: files that do not meet the specified requirements will not be reviewed; the editorial board reserves the right to reject materials that do not comply with these submission guidelines; materials that are not accompanied by the author's consent to the publication rules will not be considered.
- Review Requirements. Each scientific article must have a review by a specialist in the relevant scientific field holding a doctoral or candidate of science degree.
- Review Process. The journal implements a double-blind peer review system, where neither the author knows the reviewer nor the reviewer knows the author. All correspondence is conducted through the journal's editorial office. The reviewer must consider the submitted article within three weeks from receipt and send either a motivated refusal of review or a review to the editorial office (via email or postal mail).
- Review Procedure. The editorial board recommends using a standard review form. The reviewer can: Recommend publication; Recommend publication after revision considering remarks; Not recommend publication. If the reviewer recommends publication after revision or does not recommend publication, the review must include reasons for this decision.
- Decision-Making Process. After receiving reviews, the editorial board considers the submitted articles at its regular meeting and makes a final decision based on the review assessment.
- Dispute Resolution. If the author disagrees with the reviewer's remarks, they can contact the responsible editor to argue their disagreement. The editorial board decides on: publication, changing the reviewer, involving an additional reviewer.
- Additional Review. Articles may be sent for additional review based on sufficient grounds. An article resubmitted by the author after revision is considered according to the general procedure.
- External Reviewers. External reviewers may be involved in the following cases:
- When there is no editorial board member overseeing the specific field;
- When an editorial board member cannot prepare a review;
- When the editorial board disagrees with the review opinion;
- When an article is submitted by an editorial board member.
The editorial board sends a letter requesting a review to a scientist with relevant research in the article's subject area. The article and recommended review form are attached.
- Review Storage. Reviews are stored by the publisher and editorial office for 5 years. Upon request, the editorial office sends review copies to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.
Important Note. The scientific-practical and analytical journal «The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology» does not exempt manuscripts from review regardless of the authors' status.
Publishing Ethics
The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal «The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology» are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org, and requirements for peer-reviewed journals, elaborated by the "Elsevier" Publishing House (in accordance with international ethical rules of scientific publications)
1. Introduction
1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for society-owned or sponsored journal: "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology"
1.2.Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.
1.3. Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal programmes record «the minutes of science» and we recognise our responsibilities as the keeper of those «minutes» in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1.Publication decision – The Editor of a learned "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology" is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on 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 underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology" 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.
2.2.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.
2.3.Confidentiality – The editor and any editorial staff of "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology" 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.
2.4.Disclosure and Conflicts of interest
2.4.1. 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.
2.4.2. 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.
2.5.Vigilance over published record – An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.
2.6.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.
3. Duties of Reviewers
3.1.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. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
3.2.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 of "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology" and excuse himself from the review process.
3.3.Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.
3.4.Standard and objectivity – Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
3.5.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.
3.6.Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
3.6.1.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.
3.6.2. 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.
4. Duties of Authors
4.1.Reporting standards
4.1.1. 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 behaviour and are unacceptable.
4.1.2. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.
4.2.Data Access and Retention – Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
4.3.Originality and Plagiarism
4.3.1. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
4.3.2. 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 behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4.Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
4.4.1. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at www.icmje.org.
4.5.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.
4.6.Authorship of the Paper
4.6.1. 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.
4.6.2. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
4.7.Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
4.7.1. If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.
4.7.2. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
4.8.1. 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.
4.8.2. 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 possible stage.
4.9. Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology" journal and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learn 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.
5. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)
5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology" in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
5.2. The publisher should support "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology" journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.
5.3. Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.
5.4. Publisher should provide specialised legal review and counsel if necessary.
The section is prepared according to the files (http://health.elsevier.ru/attachments/editor/file/ethical_code_final.pdf) of Elsevier publisher (https://www.elsevier.com/) and files (http://publicationethics.org/resources) from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE - http://publicationethics.org/).
Founder
- Limited Liability Company «Expert 16»
Publication Fees
Publication of scientific articles in the journal «The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology» is fee-based. Payment is required after approval of the editorial-publishing fee
Full-time postgraduate students have a quota allowing them to publish materials free of charge
The editorial-publishing fee includes: copy-editing, proofreading, reference preparation, DOI assignment, layout design, online publication on the journal's website, inclusion in scientific citation databases and repositories.
Fee Structure:
- Publication cost for articles 8-10 pages: 6,500 rubles.
- Additional charge for each extra page: 350 rubles.
- Cost of a printed journal copy: 1,500 rubles.
Payment Terms. Payment is made after the scientific editor approves the article for publication. The payment amount does not influence editorial decisions. Publication fees for retracted articles are non-refundable.
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 Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology" use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.
Preprint and postprint Policy
The editorial board of the "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology" allows authors to post the manuscript as a preprint before submission for review and to archive independently their articles in disciplinary and institutional repositories.
Preprints
The editorial board of the "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology" encourages uploading preprints on preprint servers. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) defines a preprint as 'a scholarly manuscript posted by the author(s) in an openly accessible platform, usually before or in parallel with the peer review process.'
A preprint publication shall not be considered duplicate publication nor shall it influence the editor's decision to publish it in the "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology".
The author must notify the editorial board of the "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology" about the posted preprint at submission of the manuscript for review, furnishing a link to the preprint with its DOI identifier and the dissemination terms and conditions.
It is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published manuscript in the preprint record. The link must contain the DOI and the URL of the article published on the journal's website. The original preprint should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. The preprint should not be replaced with the text of the published article.
Do not delete the preprint text.
Manuscripts Accepted for Publication
The editorial board of the "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology" allows manuscripts that have been reviewed and are accepted for publication to be archived independently.
This version of the manuscript may be disseminated through:
- personal website or blog;
- institutional repository;
- disciplinary repository;
- direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this version of the manuscript for personal use.
The text of the manuscript should contain the author’s clarifications about its status and information about the planned publication.
Example: The ARTICLE TITLE has been reviewed, accepted for publication, and will be published in 2021 (3) of the "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology".
Once the final version of the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published article to the publication record. The posted text should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. Do not replace the text of the posted manuscript. Do not delete the text of the posted manuscript.
Final Versions of Manuscripts
The editorial board of the "The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology" allows manuscripts that have been peer-reviewed, accepted for publication, edited and ready for publication (proofread and typeset) to be archived independently.
This version of the manuscript may be disseminated through:
- personal website or blog;
- institutional repository;
- disciplinary repository;
- direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this version of the manuscript for personal use.
Once the final version of the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published article to the publication record. The posted text should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. Do not replace the text of the posted manuscript. Do not delete the text of the posted manuscript.
Revenue Sources
The publication of the journal is financed by the funds of the parent organization, at the expense of the publisher, publication of advertising materials, publication of reprints.
Editorial Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the Journal
Basic Provisions
- AI cannot be listed as an author or co-author of a publication
- All AI-generated results must undergo mandatory human verification
- Mandatory disclosure of AI usage information in the publication is required
Permitted AI Usage
AI can be used for:
- Spell checking and punctuation verification
- Text formatting assistance
- Bibliography management
- Data analysis of initial research materials
- Literature search for additional sources
- Research method development support
Prohibited AI Usage
AI must not be used for:
- Creation of primary scientific content
- Formulation of scientific conclusions
- Image generation
- Replacement of expert data assessment
Disclosure Requirements
The publication must include:
- AI tool identification – name and version of the used AI instrument
- Purpose description – goals and methods of AI application
- Task specification – particular tasks the AI was utilized for
- Scope description – detailed explanation of AI involvement in the research process
Important Warnings
- AI may generate inaccurate or unreliable information
- Confidential data must not be uploaded to AI systems
- Publications without disclosure of AI usage information may be rejected
Quality Control
The editorial board conducts additional verification if there are suspicions of improper AI usage. Compliance checks are performed to ensure adherence to AI usage policies.
