- » Aims and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer Review Process
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Article Retraction Policy
- » Artificial Intelligence Policy
- » Personal Data Processing Policy
- » Author Fees
- » Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
- » Plagiarism Policy
- » Preprint and Postprint Policy
- » Revenue Sources
Aims and Scope
Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki (Kazan Journal of Historical, Linguistic, and Legal Research) is an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed academic journal that publishes high-quality original and review articles covering fundamental and applied aspects of history, linguistics, and jurisprudence.
The journal aims to promote and disseminate the most important research findings concerning various sociocultural phenomena and processes, focusing on how they develop over time, become reflected in language, and are embedded in law. Manuscripts submitted for consideration may be discipline-specific (i.e., addressing particular aspects of linguistics, history, and jurisprudence) or cross-disciplinary (i.e., advancing new areas of research inquiry in the three fields and their synergies), such as works on intercultural communication in historical perspective, domain-specific linguistic analysis, the use of linguistic methods in historical research, the role of language in bringing legal certainty, etc.
Section Policies
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Publication Frequency
6 issues per year
Open Access Policy
Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki (Kazan Journal of Historical, Linguistic, and Legal Research) is an open access journal, providing immediate and unrestricted access to all published articles in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI).
All articles were distributed under Creative Common License (CC BY), permitting all readers to read, download, copy, distribute, link, and use them without any financial, legal, or technical barriers, provided the original authors and source are properly credited.
For more information, please read BOAI statement.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
- National Electronic Library (eLibrary.ru)
Peer Review Process
Initial screening
All submitted manuscripts are first assessed by our Executive Secretary and Handling Editor to ensure that they align with the journal’s aims and scope and meet all submission and formatting standards. Manuscripts that fail to meet basic editorial requirements may be rejected without external review or returned for revision and resubmission.
External review
Manuscripts that have successfully passed the initial editorial check are sent for double-blind peer review. Reviewers are selected based on their reputation and expertise in the area covered by the submitted manuscript. Manuscript contributors (authors and co-authors), along with their institutional peers, students, and academic supervisors, do not ethically qualify as reviewers.
The review period typically takes from 1 to 3 months, but, if deemed necessary to the review process, the journal’s editorial board reserves the right to extend it.
Re-review and additional review
The journal’s editorial board may send individual manuscripts for re-review or additional review (by the same or new reviewers).
Review form
The reviewer’s report should comply with the review form developed by the journal.
Review criteria
Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:
- relevance to the journal’s aims and scope;
- coverage of the most important advances in the research question addressed in the manuscript;
- adequacy and quality of the sources analyzed and cited;
- organization of the manuscript (logical connections between its different parts, consistency of the presentation, absence of contradictions, etc.);
- quality of the analysis that has been carried out;
- validity, reliability, and robustness of the results obtained and their interpretation by the authors;
- originality of the manuscript and its contribution to the field;
- compliance with the journal’s formatting, referencing, and writing requirements;
- quality of the Abstract.
Reviewer’s recommendation
Reviewers make a recommendation, from among several possibilities:
- accept the manuscript without revision;
- invite the authors to revise their manuscript and resubmit it for further review before a final decision is reached;
- reject the manuscript.
Storage and provision of reviewers’ reports
All reviewers’ reports are stored at the journal’s editorial office for 5 years. Upon an official request in cases established by law, their copies may be provided to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation.
Final decision
The final decision on whether to accept, revise, or reject the manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief and the journal’s editorial board, considering the reviewers’ recommendation and feedback, and is then clearly communicated to the authors (along with the reviewer’s comments) in a formal letter by the Executive Secretary or Handling Editor. A positive recommendation from the reviewer does not guarantee publication in the journal. Manuscripts recommended for rejection by the reviewers are not considered for publication.
Publishing Ethics
In line with the Code of Publishing Ethics developed by the Committee on the Ethics of Scientific Publications (Russia, Moscow), the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers elaborated by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki (Kazan Journal of Historical, Linguistic, and Legal Research) subscribes to the ethical guidelines, compliance with which is mandatory for all sides involved in the process of publishing (editors, authors, reviewers, and publisher).
The journal is responsible for prevention of publication malpractice. All articles that fail to meet the journal’s standards, i.e., if some kind of malpractice or unethical behavior are discovered at any stage (even after the publication), will be immediately withdrawn from the publication process.
Editors
The journal’s editors must:
- carefully consider all materials submitted by authors (based on relevance, integrity, and fitting into the journal scope);
- treat all authors respectfully, regardless of their sex, racial affiliation, and other subjective qualities;
- observe intellectual property rights of all authors and any third parties involved in the publication process;
- screen all submissions for plagiarism and falsified content and report serious violations or other misconduct. In no way shall editors encourage misconduct or knowingly allow it to take place;
- invite only highly professional specialists as reviewers and ensure confidentiality and anonymity of the peer review process.
Authors
Authorship (and co-authorship) is limited to individuals who have contributed substantially to the process of research or interpretation of its results. Authors submitting manuscripts to our journal must:
- ensure that their work is based on accurate and reliable data and that results are presented and interpreted objectively, without fabrication or falsification;
- avoid submitting the same manuscript, in whole or in part, to another journal when it is under consideration. Multiple and redundant submissions are not allowed;
- disclose all funding sources and other support in the Acknowledgments section;
- obtain written permission before using data from private communication or correspondence;
- get written permission from the copyright owners and credit the source(s) within their article when data from other published sources are used;
- notify the journal about any errors or inaccuracies in their manuscripts, whether submitted, accepted, or published, so that appropriate actions, correction or retraction, can be taken.
Please note that the final decision on the manuscript rests with the Editor-in-Chief and our editorial board.
Authors retain their copyright without restrictions but grant the journal the right to publish and distribute their published article (in print and electronic formats), subject to Creative Commons License (CC BY), and agree to indexing in citation databases and free access to the full version on eLIBRARY.RU, Cyberleninka Library, and the journal’s website.
Reviewers
Reviewers must:
- support the rigor of the peer review process and adhere to the COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers;
- treat all manuscripts, either during or after the peer-review process, as confidential documents (they cannot keep, share, or use data from the reviewed manuscripts without permission);
- refuse to review when they are not qualified to do so or if any conflicts of interest exist;
- notify the journal’s team if they need more time to prepare a review report or if they have any questions or concerns, including plagiarism, AI use, or any other forms of malpractice;
- objectively assess the manuscript with the standards of our journal in mind and support their comments by sound scientific reasoning;
- recommend a particular course of action (accept, revise, or reject the manuscript) and provide a fair and constructive feedback that would help the authors to strengthen their work and could be used by the journal to decide whether to publish the submitted manuscript or not.
Please consider that reviewing for Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki (Kazan Journal of Historical, Linguistic, and Legal Research) is by default anonymous.
Founder
Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education "Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University"
Article Retraction Policy
Purpose of Retraction
The goal of retraction is to inform readers about materials containing significant errors or unreliable data that cannot be trusted. Data unreliability may arise from honest mistakes or deliberate misconduct, such as duplicate publications, plagiarism, or undisclosed conflicts of interest that could distort data interpretation or recommendations for use. Retraction also serves to uphold scientific integrity by warning other researchers and readers against using the results of the retracted article in subsequent studies. Its primary function is to maintain the reliability of scientific research by removing misleading or inaccurate data from circulation. Retraction thus contributes to upholding high scientific standards and trust in published research, ensuring that only reliable and accurate data remain within the scientific community.
The editorial board of Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki (Kazan Journal of Historical, Linguistic, and Legal Research), following the Retraction Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Rules for Retraction of the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (ASEP), adheres to the following retraction policy.
Grounds for Retraction
Articles may be retracted due to violations of scientific publishing ethics, including:
- incorrect and/or unattributed borrowing (plagiarism);
- duplicate publication in multiple outlets;
- self-plagiarism;
- falsification or fabrication of data (e.g., manipulation of experimental results);
- identification of significant errors in the publication (e.g., incorrect interpretation of research findings), undermining its scientific value;
- misrepresentation of authorship (including individuals who do not meet authorship criteria);
- undisclosed conflicts of interest;
- republishing an article without the author’s consent;
- other violations of publication ethics.
When a retraction decision is made based on an expert review, triggered by third-party information or an author’s request, the authors are formally notified. Authors (or the corresponding author in case of collective authorship) must review and acknowledge the reasoning for retraction. If authors refuse to retract, the editorial board reserves the right to proceed without their consent, as it bears responsibility for the journal’s content and data accuracy.
Retraction Procedure
The retraction process is initiated by the Editor-in-Chief based on expert review and the authors’ responses to specific concerns. Authors either agree to the retraction or present convincing arguments against it. The editorial board makes the final decision on retraction.
- Author-Initiated Retraction: Authors submit a written request to the editorial board explaining the reasons (e.g., errors in the presented data or unauthorized use of third-party information). If the board agrees to the retraction, it is implemented in line with COPE guidelines and ASEP ethical standards;
- Third-Party-Initiated Retraction: The editorial board conducts an expert review based on third-party claims and notifies the authors of its decision. If ignored, the editorial board may proceed independently.
Retraction decisions are documented in an editorial board meeting protocol. The retraction statement includes:
- author(s)’ name(s), article title, journal name, publication details, and DOI;
- the party initiating the retraction;
- grounds for retraction (e.g., plagiarism, duplication, with references to the original source);
- date of decision and link to the article metadata page on the journal’s website, containing the retraction notice and the full text marked as “RETRACTED.”
In rare cases, articles may need to be removed entirely (e.g., defamatory content or threats to public health). Metadata (title and authors) will be retained, with an explanation of why the article was removed.
The Editor-in-Chief sends the retraction protocol to:
- National Electronic Library (eLibrary.ru) and other bibliographic databases. While article information remains in the system, its indexing in databases like RSCI is removed, and the retraction note is appended;
- ASEP’s Ethics Council for inclusion in the Retraction Database;
- relevant dissertation councils if the article is referenced in academic defenses.
Retraction information is also published as a separate file on the journal’s website.
Consequences
Based on the expert review, the editorial board may impose a publication ban on the author(s) for a specific period. This step ensures that the integrity and credibility of the journal are upheld.
Artificial Intelligence Policy
This policy is triggered by the rapid rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and its profound but mixed effects on the world. Drawing on the ethical guidelines put forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and major academic publishers, we advise the following best practices on responsible use of AI for all authors, reviewers, and editors. Our journal will continue to monitor ongoing developments in this area and will adjust or update the policy below as appropriate.
For Authors
Authorship and co-authorship. AI tools, including Large Language Models such as GPT, cannot be credited as authors or co-authors of a work published in our journal (COPE Position on Authorship and AI Tools), as they do not currently satisfy our authorship criteria and assume no responsibility, whether personal, legal, or ethical, for the integrity, accuracy, and quality of the research process, the analysis of its results, and the contents of the manuscript. Accordingly, they are unable to fully comply with our requirements for authors during manuscript submission, peer review, editorial revision, and final approval of the revised version of the manuscript to be published.
Responsibility. Since AI is not an independent legal entity, it cannot be held responsible for its actions, outputs, and errors. Authors, in turn, are fully responsible and accountable for their work and its contents, which means that they must ensure that the manuscript represents their authentic and original contribution and that all information they provide to our journal is accurate, non-misleading, and relevant. They must also carefully check that their work does not infringe third-party rights or raise any ethical considerations regarding both international standards and our journal’s publishing ethics.
The use of AI in research and manuscript preparation. Considering that AI use in research is associated with increased concerns about its transparency and quality, complicates authorship attribution, raises the risk of unintentional plagiarism and self-plagiarism, and permits and promotes violations of data privacy and intellectual property rights, authors submitting to our journal are not allowed to rely on AI tools as aids in producing and analyzing research data, drawing conclusions, and writing manuscripts.
The use of AI in tables, schemes, graphics, and images. Our journal does not permit the use of AI to create or selectively manipulate (enhance, obscure, move, remove, or introduce a specific feature) tables, schemes, graphics, and images. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable, if necessary, when they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original.
The only exceptions may be granted when the use of AI is part of the research design, methods, or subject and scope (i.e., in manuscripts specifically about AI), in strict compliance with applicable ethical, legal, publication, and other standards. All exceptions must be labeled clearly as generated by AI in the relevant caption field and are evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Authors of such manuscripts may be asked to provide pre-AI-adjusted raw versions of tables, schemes, graphics, and images used to create the final submitted versions, for expert and editorial assessment.
Disclosure of the use of AI. Authors must disclose any use of AI in the research process or manuscript preparation, as long as such use does not conflict with this policy and if copyright and terms of use restrictions are adhered to. The disclosure should appear in the Methods section or a suitable alternative part of the manuscript and include the official name, version number, and other identifiers of AI tools, as well as details on how they were utilized.
For Reviewers
All manuscripts under review must be treated as confidential documents (COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers). For this reason, reviewers must not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it (including individual sections or data) into AI tools (whether cloud-based or locally installed) to protect intellectual property rights, personal data, and third-party rights throughout the publication process. The requirement to maintain confidentiality extends to the reviewer’s report, as it may also contain confidential information.
Our editors select reviewers based on their expertise and invaluable in-depth knowledge of the subject matter of the work they are asked to evaluate, which is outside the scope of AI. Therefore, reviewers are solely responsible for the contents of their reports and are not allowed to use AI to assist in manuscript evaluation in any way, even to improve language and readability (Advice from COPE Council (Case 26-03)).
If the reviewer suspects that a manuscript they have been sent to review was generated with AI (in whole or in part) or detects fabricated and manipulated AI content, they should immediately alert the handling editor and not contact the authors directly or try AI checkers without explicit permission from the journal (Advice from COPE Council (Case 25-01)).
For Editors
The journal is committed to maintaining the confidentiality and privacy of submitted manuscripts at all stages of the editorial process. To align with this principle, our editors do not use AI tools to communicate with authors and reviewers or to assess submissions, screen them for originality, analyze the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, and make editorial decisions (acceptance, rejection, and requests for revision). The journal does not employ AI in the post-acceptance editing of manuscripts for substantive changes to the text, formatting, modifications of data and images, etc. (COPE Discussion Document: Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Decision Making).
The exception is the use of Antiplagiat, a licensed software that meets data privacy and security requirements for detecting inappropriate textual borrowings, with its built-in AI detector to conduct plagiarism and self-plagiarism checks and discover possible AI involvement. The results of this automated detection are taken into account when assessing the origin of submissions and their compliance with ethical standards. However, final decisions remain contingent on human oversight and direct communication with authors and reviewers.
Personal Data Processing Policy
In accordance with Russian Federal Law No. 152 of July 27, 2006 “On Personal Data”:
- personal data include any information that relates, either directly or implicitly, to an identified or identifiable living individual (data subject);
- personal data processing refers to actions (operations) or a series of actions (operations) performed, both with and without the use of automation tools, on personal data. It includes collection, recording, organization, storage, improvement (update, alteration), retrieval, use, transmission (dissemination, provision, sharing), anonymization, blocking, erasure, and destruction.
Authors (data subjects) give their full consent to the storage and processing, on an indefinite basis, of the following personal data:
- academic degree and rank;
- employing company, job position;
- E-mail address;
- phone number;
- postal address (if needed).
With the consent of the data subjects, their personal data are processed to:
- identify the author(s) of the manuscript;
- compile analytical and statistical reports;
- develop databases and information systems.
Personal data can only be shared with third parties if the data subjects whose personal data are involved have been informed about the sharing and provided with all necessary details (name, address) about the third parties.
Withdrawal of the consent to the storage and processing of personal data requires prior written notice to the editorial office of the journal.
Author Fees
Authors who publish in Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki (Kazan Journal of Historical, Linguistic, and Legal Research) are not required to pay any submission or article processing charges. The publishing costs are covered by the journal’s publisher.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All participants of the publication process (authors, editors, and reviewers) must disclose any potential conflicts of interest or personal circumstances that could be perceived as having inappropriate influence.
Plagiarism Policy
Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki (Kazan Journal of Historical, Linguistic, and Legal Research) uses Antiplagiat, a Russian licensed software for plagiarism detection, to screen all submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism are followed.
Preprint and Postprint Policy
Submitted (before peer review) or accepted (reviewed but unpublished) manuscripts cannot be shared publicly (i.e., as preprints). Following publication in Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki (Kazan Journal of Historical, Linguistic, and Legal Research), authors are encouraged to share a link to their article on the journal's website when posting it on personal or public platforms.
Glossary by Open Policy Finder (Jisc)
Preprint - In the context of Open Access, a preprint is a draft of an academic article or other publication before it has been submitted for peer-review or other quality assurance procedure as part of the publication process. Preprints cover initial and successive drafts of articles, working papers or draft conference papers.
Postprint - The final version of an academic article or other publication - after it has been peer-reviewed and revised into its final form by the author. As a general term this covers both the author's final version and the version as published, with formatting and copy-editing changes in place.
Revenue Sources
The publication of the journal is financed by the funds of the parent organization.
