“Shagi / Steps” the Journal of the SASH

An article may be published in Russian or in English.
The Editorial Team edits contributions in both Russian and English.

Authors writing in their non-native language are advised, prior to submission, to have their articles edited by colleagues for whom the given language is native or who have native-level proficiency in that language.
 
 

Submitted articles undergo mandatory review. Depending on the contents of a submission, the process may involve members of the Editorial Team and the international Editorial Board, as well as scholars and specialists from the Russian Presidential Academy of the National Economy and Public Administration, and from other scientific and educational institutions in Russia and abroad.

Only manuscripts complying with the style sheet published on the journal’s website will be considered. There is no fee for review of a submission.

Expert evaluation of submitted articles goes through the following stages:
1. Preliminary consideration of submissions is carried out by the Editorial Team.
At this point, the decision to reject a submission may be taken jointly by members of the Editorial Team responsible for the sections of the journal and by the Editor-in-Chief. A submission might be turned down if it does not fit within the range of core subjects featured in the journal or if its scholarly quality is judged inadequate. In a case of incompatibility with the journal’s requirements, the Editorial Team will notify the author by email regarding the rejection of the submission. In some cases, the Editorial Team may propose that the author revise and resubmit the manuscript.

2. Expert evaluation is carried out on the basis of a single-blind peer review system (the reviewer’s name is concealed from the author). Reviews may be written in Russian or in English, and choice of format is left to the reviewer (see the guideline ). In cases of significant differences in judgment between the reviewers and the Editorial Team, or if an author challenges a review in a substantive and professional manner, the Editorial Team arranges for a new review and takes into account opinions of all members of the Editorial Board. The Editorial Team notifies the author by email regarding their decision.
In evaluating a manuscript, reviewers are asked to bear in mind the following criteria:

• the submission’s compatibility with the journal’s scope;
• its theoretical and methodological adequacy;
• the data sufficiency and reliability of its sources;
• its analytical accuracy.

The review process is carried out in accordance with the Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement.
The following types of submissions are peer-reviewed: articles, brief communications, including reports of expeditions, and materials (publications, translations, etc.). Other submissions, such as conference reports, reviews, obituaries, etc. usually are not peer-reviewed, although they are evaluated by the Editors.

Depending on the results of the review process, the Editors may make an initial decision to accept a manuscript for publication without revisions, to accept it subject to substantive revisions, or to reject it. Within two months of submitting a manuscript, the author receives a formal response regarding the possibility of publication in the journal; the author may also receive a list of revisions required for final acceptance for publication.

3. If the decision is to accept subject to substantive revisions, the author is requested to make the necessary changes as quickly as possible and to resubmit. Usually, the revised manuscript will be seen by the original reviewers.

Once an article is accepted, it undergoes literary and scholarly editing. Once this process has been completed, the author receives a copy of the edited manuscript for review and authorization. The author must confirm by email that the article may be published in the final edited form. Where multiple authors are involved, consent is given by the author charged with correspondence with the Editorial Team.

If a submitted manuscript is rejected, the Editorial Team provides the author with the reasons for this decision. However, the identity of the reviewers is kept confidential and full texts of the reviews are never sent to authors. If a manuscript is rejected at any stage of the process, the author is free to submit it to another journal.

The reasons for rejecting a manuscript are as follows:
 
 

All submitted papers are evaluated on the principle of single-blind peer review.
Reviewers should evaluate each manuscript for its intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political views of the author or authors.
Prior to reaching a final decision regarding a submitted manuscript, the Editors may not disclose any information about it to anyone other than the author or authors, the consultants and experts contacted by the Editorial Team, and the publisher.

A reviewer must avoid any conflict of interest with respect to the manuscript under review, its author or authors, and/or the organization funding the research. Where a conflict of interest arises, the reviewer must notify the Editorial Team and recuse himself.

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inadmissible. Reviewers should present their conclusions clearly and should provide supporting arguments. A Reviewer should also call to the Editors’ attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which he/she has personal knowledge.
 
 

At all stages of the editorial and publishing process members of the Editorial Team responsible for the sections of the journal, arrange for:
а) preliminary consideration of authors’ submissions;
b) selection of reviewers with appropriate research interests;
c) maintaining confidentiality during the review process;
d) deciding on acceptance, rejection, or submission to additional peer review, depending on the reviewers’ reports.

The Editor-in-Chief coordinates all the work of the Editorial Team and makes decisions on key issues; he or she also authorizes the printing of each issue.

The Editor-in-Chief guarantees full compliance with all the ethical standards set forth in this document.

The Editor-in-Chief, the Deputy Editor-in-Chief, and the members of the Editorial Team responsible for the sections of the journal have sole responsibility for acceptance or rejection of a manuscript. They may reject it for cause without initiating the review process (its subject matter is inappropriate for the journal, it is clearly of poor scholarly quality, it was previously published elsewhere, etc.).

The Editors should ensure that all the materials they publish conform to international standards in scholarly and publishing ethics.

The Editors must be careful not to abuse their official position and must maintain their impartiality and objectivity toward all participants in the editorial and publishing process irrespective of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, nationality, or political opinion.

The Editor should recuse himself or herself from handling a manuscript in which he or she has a conflict of interest.

The Editorial Team should require that all those involved in the publishing process disclose relevant conflicts of interest. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as publication of a retraction or an expression of concern.

Members of the Editorial Team must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to unauthorized persons.
 
 

The international Editorial Board is the supreme consulting collegial body of the journal Shagi / Steps. Thanks to its academic authority, geographical coverage, and the principle of collegiality, the international Editorial Board guarantees that the published content of the journal meets international standards of scholarly and publishing ethics.