Ru En
ISSN: 2686-6706 (Print)
ISSN: 2686-6714 (Online)
Subscription index: 65055
Ru En
Dear authors and readers! Starting from the issue 2, 2019 the name of the scientific journal has been changed. The new name of the journal is "Science Governance and Scientometrics". From 2020 Science Governance and Scientometrics has been included in the VAK (Higher Attestation Commission List.
ISSN: 2686-6706 (Print)
ISSN: 2686-6714 (Online)
Subscription index: 65055
Address: 20A, Dobrolubova St., Moscow, Russia, 127254
Tel.: +7 (495) 916-2884, fax: +7 (495) 916-1301
Upravleniye naukoy i naukometriya
scientific journal
Dear authors and readers! Starting from the issue 2, 2019 the name of the scientific journal has been changed. The new name of the journal is "Science Governance and Scientometrics". From 2020 Science Governance and Scientometrics has been included in the VAK (Higher Attestation Commission List.

Publication Ethics

The Editorial Board of the Journal adheres to the ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community and relies on the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics.

Principles of Preparing a Scientific Article

The Editorial Board accepts materials containing the accurate and reliable results of research conducted, as well as objective discussions on the significance of the conducted research. The data underlying the research should be clearly described in writing. The article should contain enough information to verify and repeat the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly untruthful statements are unacceptable.

Authors may be asked to provide the source materials for an editorial review. Authors should be prepared to store source materials for a reasonable period of time after their publication, and submit them to the Editorial Board, if possible.

If the authors discover a significant mistake or inaccuracy in the published work, they are obligated to immediately notify the editor or publisher of the journal, and assist in eliminating or correcting the mistake. If the editor or publisher finds out from a third party that the published work contains significant mistakes, the author is obligated to immediately correct them or submit to the editors proof of the correctness of the original article.


Authors should submit only original work. When using text or graphic information obtained from the works of others, references to the respective publications or the author's written permission are required.

Authors should state that their work is being published for the first time. If elements of the manuscript were previously published in another article, the authors are obligated to refer to their earlier work and explain the significance of differences between the new and previous work. The copying of previous works and paraphrasing them is unacceptable; they can only be used as a basis for new conclusions.

Submitting an article to more than one journal simultaneously is regarded as unethical behavior, and is thus unacceptable.

Principles of Respecting the Rights of All Authors

The authors are obliged to recognize the contributions of others who have had a significant impact on the nature of their study. Bibliographic references to the works used are required. Information obtained privately through conversations, correspondence or discussion with third parties should not be used without obtaining open written permission from their source.

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, implementation or interpretation of the submitted research. All those who have made a significant contribution should be listed as co-authors. Those who have participated in certain significant aspects of the research project should be listed as project participants.

The author should ensure that the names of all co-authors and project participants are included in the lists of co-authors and participants, and that all co-authors are acquainted with the final version of the scientific work and approve it, and also consent to its publication.

Principles of Interaction Between the Author and Editorial Board

The Editorial Board decides to publish materials on the condition that they are reviewed by experts — qualified specialists in information security, without disclosing the personal data of the reviewers to the authors without their consent (i.e. blindly). Thus, the experts have the opportunity to freely express their motivated criticisms about the level and clarity of presentation of the material, its correspondence to the journal's scientific specialization, and novelty and reliability of the results.

The Editorial Board is obliged to evaluate manuscripts solely on their scientific merit, regardless of the race, sex, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship and political views of the authors.

The Editorial Board bears full responsibility for publication decisions.


When working with unpublished materials, all employees of the Editorial Board undertake to comply with the requirements of the Russian legislation as regards information security, including the personal information of the authors and reviewers.

Any manuscript submitted for examination is considered a confidential document, meaning it is provided to a strictly limited circle of people involved in the procedure of making a decision regarding its publication. The editor and staff of the editorial office do not have the right to use unpublished materials presented in the manuscript in their own studies without the written consent of the author.

Principles of Preparing Reviews

Expert evaluation by reviewers helps the editorial staff make decisions on the publication of the materials submitted, and can also help the author improve their work through constructive cooperation with the editors.

Any reviewer selected to evaluate a manuscript who believes their qualifications are insufficient to review said work, or that they will not be able to review the work on time, must notify the editor and decline to review.

Since all manuscripts submitted for review are confidential, they may not be shown to other reviewers or discussed with other experts without the prior permission of the Editor-in-Chief.

Reviews of scientific articles should be objective. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers are required to express their views clearly and with substantiation.

Experts should identify relevant published works in the reviewed material that were not cited by the authors. Any statements, conclusions or arguments that have already been used in any previous publications should be properly formatted as citations. The reviewer is also obligated to bring to the attention of the Editorial Board any substantial or partial similarity to any other work that the reviewer has direct knowledge of.

Unpublished materials used in the submitted manuscript should not be used in the reviewer's own research without written consent from the author. Confidential information or ideas obtained during the review should remain confidential and not be used for personal gain. Reviewers are prohibited from participating in the examination and evaluation of manuscripts in which they have a personal interest.

Conflicts of Interest

The editorial office is obligated to request from all participants in the manuscript consideration process a disclosure of existing competing interests. If a conflict of interest is identified after publication, the Editorial Board is obligated to publish the appropriate amendments.

In the event of a conflict of interest between members of the Editorial Board as a result of competing relations, cooperation and/or other relations in connection with one of the authors, companies, or institutions, the manuscript is transferred to an independent member of the Editorial Board to resolve the conflict.

Reviewers are prohibited from participating in the examination and evaluation of manuscripts in the event of a conflict of interest or personal involvement.

If an ethical complaint is filed regarding a submitted manuscript or published article, the Editorial Board takes reasonable measures in response based on the experience of authoritative international journals and publishers. Every report of unethical behavior is considered no matter how long ago it occurred. If the facts are confirmed, the appropriate corrections, refutations or apologies are published.