Journal Policy
Goals and objectives
The peer-reviewed scientific journal "Materials. Technologies. Design" publishes the results of research by domestic and foreign scientists in Russian and English for the exchange of experience, theoretical and practical knowledge.
The journal publishes the following materials:
scientific articles containing original author's research with a full description of the methodology for conducting it, the results obtained, a discussion of the results and conclusions;
scientific reviews introducing readers to the latest scientific achievements in the field of materials science and mechanical engineering.
The main objectives of the journal:
publication of scientific articles reflecting the results of original open research works, theoretical and experimental studies in Russian and English;
informing the international and Russian scientific community about promising areas of research in the field of materials science and mechanical engineering;
promoting the magazine's articles in the international space and attracting an international audience of authors and readers on the subject of the magazine.
Frequency: 4 times a year
Open Access Policy
The journal provides immediate open access to its content, as free open access to research results increases the global exchange of knowledge.
Archiving
The journal uses the Platform&workflow by OJS network for electronic archiving of all published articles.
Electronic copies of published articles are stored in:
- Russian State Library
- Scientific electronic library eLIBRARY.ru
Authors are permitted to deposit all versions of their work in the institutional or other repository of their choice.
Review
Regulations on reviewing in the journal “Materials. Technologies. Design"
All articles received by the journal undergo a peer review process. Leading experts in the field of materials science, design or technology are involved in reviewing articles, depending on the direction of the article under consideration.
After receipt, each manuscript is sent to two reviewers (if the topic of the manuscript concerns several areas of the journal, the article may be sent to three or more specialists). After the editorial board has determined the list of potential reviewers, they are sent a letter inviting them to register on the website and participate in the peer review of the article. If agreed, the expert is given access to the reviewer’s personal account.
All reviewers are recognized experts on the subject of the materials being reviewed and have published on the subject of the article being reviewed over the past three years. The journal adheres to a policy of one-way blind reviewing, that is, the author of the articles does not disclose the name of the reviewer. The period for initial review is usually 1 month from the date of receipt of the article. After the expert agrees to review the article, a message is sent to him indicating the deadline for the review procedure, and messages are sent with a frequency of 1 week reminding him of the need to carry out the review procedure. In some cases, the review period - at the request of the reviewer or the decision of the editorial board - the review period can be extended to 2 (two) months.
When writing a review, the reviewer is recommended to use the “Review Form for the Journal Materials. Technologies. Design" (see Appendix 1)
The review history is registered in the electronic editorial system of the journal, where the chronology of changes in article statuses, reviewer data and review texts are stored, which are available to the authors of the article under review at any time.
Copies of reviews are sent to the authors. Authors are required to take into account the reviewers' comments and make appropriate corrections to the article or provide a reasoned response about disagreement with the reviewer's comments. The response period of the author (authors) of the article is no more than 2 (two) months. After the expiration of this period, the article is considered newly received.
After correction, the article is reconsidered by the editors or again sent to the reviewer, and subsequently the final decision is made by the editorial board.
The final decision on all articles is made by the editorial board at its meeting after discussing each manuscript, which is recorded in the protocol and in the article registration journal.
The date of receipt of the article in the journal is the date of receipt of the version of the article on which the final decision of the editorial board was made.
The editorial secretary informs the author about the decision made by the editorial board (positive or negative) no later than 5 (five) working days.
If the article is rejected, the editors send a reasoned refusal to the author. Reviews are stored in the publishing house and in the editorial office of the peer-reviewed scientific publication for five years. The editors of the peer-reviewed scientific publication “Materials. Technologies. Design" undertakes to send copies of reviews to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation upon receipt of a corresponding request by the editors of a peer-reviewed scientific publication.
Ethics of scientific publications
In their activities, the editorial board of a scientific journal adheres to the provisions of the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (http://www.elsevier.com/editors/perk) and Editorial Statement formulated by The Council of Science CSE (http://www.councilscienceeditors .org/resource-library/editorial-policies/), International Committee on Publication Ethics (http://publicationethics.org/about)
Guidelines
1.1. Compliance with publishing ethics by the editorial board.
1.2. Preventing damage to intellectual and ethical standards in the presence of commercial interests.
1.3. Willingness to publish corrections, clarifications, deviations and apologies when necessary.
1.4. Preventing the publication of plagiarism and fraudulent data.
Ethical principles that should guide the author of a scientific publication
When submitting materials to the scientific journal "Materials. Technologies. Design", the author (or a team of authors) understands that he bears primary responsibility for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research, which presupposes compliance with the following principles:
2.1. The authors of the article must provide reliable results of the research conducted. Claims that are known to be erroneous or falsified are unacceptable.
2.2. Authors must ensure that the research results reported in the submitted manuscript are completely original. Borrowed fragments or statements must be formalized with the obligatory indication of the author and the original source. Excessive borrowing, as well as plagiarism in any form, including unquoted, paraphrased, or appropriation of the results of others' research, is unethical and unacceptable. The presence of borrowing without reference will be considered by the editorial board as plagiarism.
2.3. Authors must provide only genuine facts and information in manuscripts; provide sufficient information to verify and repeat experiments by other researchers; do not use information obtained privately without express written permission; Prevent fabrication and falsification of data.
2.4. Do not duplicate publications (in the covering letter the author must indicate that the work is being published for the first time). If certain elements of the manuscript have been previously published, the author must refer to the earlier work and indicate the differences between the new work and the previous one.
2.5. Authors should not submit to a journal a manuscript that has been submitted to another journal and is under review.
2.6. It is necessary to acknowledge the contribution of all persons who in one way or another influenced the course of the research, in particular, the article should provide links to works that were important in the conduct of the research.
2.7. Authors must comply with ethical standards when criticizing or commenting on third party research.
2.8. Co-authors of the article must include all persons who made a significant contribution to the research. Among co-authors, it is unacceptable to indicate persons who did not participate in the study.
2.9. Authors must respect the work of the editorial board and reviewers and eliminate these shortcomings or explain them with reason.
2.10. Authors must submit and format the manuscript in accordance with the journal's accepted guidelines.
2.11. If the author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the article at the stage of its consideration or after its publication, he must immediately notify the editors of the journal.
2.12. Authors must provide the editorial board or publisher with evidence of the correctness of the original article or correct significant errors if the editorial board or publisher became aware of them from third parties.
Ethical principles in the activities of a reviewer
The reviewer carries out a scientific examination of the author's materials, as a result of which his actions must be unbiased, consisting in the implementation of the following principles:
3.1. A manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document that cannot be passed on for review or discussion to third parties not authorized by the editor.
3.2. Reviewers are required to be aware that the manuscripts sent to them are the intellectual property of the authors and are classified as information that is not subject to disclosure. A violation of confidentiality is possible only in the event of a reviewer’s statement about the unreliability or falsification of the materials presented in the article.
3.3. The reviewer should draw the attention of the editor-in-chief to the significant or partial similarity of the evaluated manuscript with any other work, as well as the absence of references to provisions, conclusions or arguments previously published in other works of this or other authors.
3.4. The reviewer should note relevant published works that are not cited (in the article).
3.5. The reviewer is obliged to give an objective and reasoned assessment of the presented research results and clearly substantiated recommendations. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
3.6. The reviewer's comments and wishes should be objective and principled, aimed at improving the scientific level of the manuscript.
3.7. The reviewer must make decisions based on specific facts and provide evidence for his decision.
3.8. Reviewers are not permitted to make copies of manuscripts for their own needs.
3.9. Reviewers may not take advantage of knowledge of the content of a work prior to its publication.
3.10. A reviewer who, in his opinion, does not have sufficient qualifications to evaluate the manuscript, or cannot be objective, for example, in the case of a conflict of interest with the author or organization, must inform the editor about this with a request to exclude him from the review process of this manuscript.
3.11. Feedback on this article is confidential. The reviewer's name is known to the executive secretary and editor-in-chief of the journal. This information is not disclosed.
Principles of professional ethics in the activities of the editor-in-chief
In his activities, the editor-in-chief is responsible for the publication of copyrighted works, which imposes the need to follow the following fundamental principles:
4.1. When making a decision on publication, the editor-in-chief of a scientific journal is guided by the reliability of the data presentation and the scientific significance of the work under consideration.
4.2. The editor-in-chief must evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, citizenship, social status or political preferences of the authors.
4.3. Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration should not be used for personal purposes or transferred to third parties without the written consent of the author. Information or ideas obtained during editing related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
4.4. The editor-in-chief should not allow information to be published if there are sufficient grounds to believe that it is plagiarism.
4.5. In his activities, the editor-in-chief undertakes:
– constantly improve the magazine;
– follow the principle of freedom of opinion;
– strive to meet the needs of readers and authors of the magazine;
– exclude the influence of business or political interests on decisions on the publication of materials;
– make a decision on the publication of materials, guided by the following main criteria: compliance of the manuscript with the subject of the journal; relevance, novelty and scientific significance of the presented article; clarity of presentation; reliability of the results and completeness of the conclusions. The quality of the study and its relevance are the basis for the decision to publish;
– take all reasonable measures to ensure the high quality of published materials and protect the confidentiality of personal information;
– take into account the recommendations of reviewers when making the final decision on publication of the article. Responsibility for the decision to publish lies entirely with the journal's editorial board;
– justify your decision in case of acceptance or rejection of the article;
– provide the author of the reviewed material with the opportunity to substantiate his research position;
– when changing the composition of the editorial board, do not cancel the decision of the previous composition on the publication of the material.
4.6. The editor-in-chief, together with the publisher, should not leave unanswered claims regarding reviewed manuscripts or published materials, and, if a conflict situation is identified, take all necessary measures to restore violated rights.
Publication fee
Publication of articles in the Journal is carried out exclusively free of charge. The magazine's editorial staff does not provide paid services and does not work with intermediaries. Articles are accepted directly from the authors. There is no provision for accelerating the publication of articles.
