Aim and Scope

The message of the journal is to create a single research space in the field of language, literature, history, folklore, philosophical and religious thought, education, culture and art of the Tatar people.

The aim of the journal is to promote and disseminate information about the most significant research achievements and innovative findings in the field of language, literature, history, folklore, philosophical and religious thought, education, culture and art of the Tatar people; to facilitate the exchange of this information in the Russian and international scientific and pedagogical community.

To achieve this goal, we are going to solve the following tasks:

• to draw attention to currently promising areas of research in the field of language, literature, history, folklore, philosophical and religious thought, education, culture and art of the Tatar people by publishing original scientific research of theoretical value and practical significance;
• to provide an opportunity for the scientific researchers and practising professionals to publish the results of their studies in these areas;
• to ensure the compliance of the journal with international requirements for scientific periodicals by careful and objective selection of manuscripts for publication;
• to attract highly qualified authors, constantly strengthening their diversity in geographical and research terms;
• to encourage interdisciplinary relationships and integrated approaches to the studied phenomena;
• to strengthen the exchange of opinions and dissemination of information in the scientific community of the Russian Federation and abroad.

Section Policies

LANGUAGE

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

LITERATURE

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

HISTORY AND SOCIETY

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

CULTURE, PERSONALITY, EDUCATION

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

PERSONALIA

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

REVIEWS

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

SCIENTIFIC CHRONICLES OF THE TURKIC WORLD

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Publication Frequency

2 times per 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

1. Peer reviewing procedure

1.1. All scientific articles submitted to the editorial office are subject to mandatory reviewing. Reviewing of manuscripts submitted for publication in the “TATARICA” Journal is organized by the editorial boards of the relevant series. The thematic series editor-in-chief is responsible for the quality of reviews and the timeliness of the manuscript reviewing. The terms of reviewing are determined by the executive secretary of the series.

1.2. The issuing editor and the executive secretary of the series send the article for reviewing if its compliance with the journal profile and the requirements for formatting are fulfilled.  The manuscripts of articles will be reviewed either by the members of the Journal editorial board and editorial boards of the thematic series of the scientific publication “TATARICA”, or highly qualified experts and faculty of Kazan Federal University and other state educational institutions of higher professional education (doctors of science, professors or candidates of science, associate professors), those whose scientific interests are within the field of research of the reviewed article. The reviewer cannot be the author or co-author of the reviewed work. Reviewers are notified that the reviewed manuscripts are the private property of the authors and contain information not subject to disclosure. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of articles. Reviewing is confidential.

1.3. Reviewing is anonymous. The author of the article is given the opportunity to read the text of the review. Anonymity breach is possible only in the case of plagiarism or falsification discovered by the reviewer in the article.

1.4. If the review contains recommendations for correcting and finalizing the article, the executive secretary of the series sends the text of the review to the author with a proposal to take into account the recommendations and prepare a new version of the article or to convincingly refute them. The article revised by the author is re-sent for reviewing.

1.5. In the case when the reviewer did not recommend the article for publication, the editorial board may send the article for revision, taking into account the comments made, or send it to another reviewer. The text of the negative review is forwarded to the author.

1.6. The final decision on the publication of the article is made by the editorial board of the series and recorded in the minutes of the editorial board meeting.

1.7. After the editorial board of the series makes a decision on the admission of the article for publication, the executive secretary of the series informs the author that the article has been accepted and indicates the terms of publication. The text of the review is forwarded to the author.

1.8. Reviews of articles should be kept by the editorial board of the thematic series for three years starting from the publication date of the articles and submitted at the request of the expert councils of the Higher Attestation Commission of the Russian Federation.

2. Requirements for the content of the review

2.1. The review should contain a qualified analysis of the material presented in the article, its objective evaluation and reasonable recommendations.

2.2. In the review, special attention should be paid to the coverage of the following issues:

• General analysis of the scientific level, terminology, structure of the article and the relevance of the topic.
• Relevance of the title to the content of the article.
• Evaluation of the article for publication in terms of language and style, its compliance with the Journal requirements for the design of the article materials.
• Precise and clear scientific presentation, compliance of the methods, techniques, recommendations and research results with modern achievements of research and practice.
• Volume of the article as a whole and its individual elements (text, tables, illustrations, bibliographic references) corresponding to the set frames. The expediency of the tables and illustrations in the article and their relevance to the topic under consideration. Recommendations for a rational reduction in volume (the exact part of the article should be indicated).
• Place of the reviewed work among others already published ones on a similar topic: identifying the novelty in this research in comparison to existing publications in the field: whether it duplicates the works of other authors or previously published works of this author (both in general and in part).
• Inaccuracies and errors made by the author.
• Detailed description of the advantages and disadvantages of the article.

2.3. The reviewer should make recommendations to the author and the publisher concerning the ways of improving the manuscript. The comments and wishes of the reviewer should be objective and fundamental, aimed at improving the scientific and methodological level of the manuscript.

2.4. The final part of the review should contain substantiated conclusions about the article as a whole and a clear recommendation on the advisability of publishing it in the TATARICA Journal within a specific scientific trend that corresponds to the nomenclature of scientific specialties approved by the Higher Attestation Commission of the Russian Federation.

Publishing Ethics

The “TATARICA” editorial board (hereinafter – editorial board) is responsible for maintaining its scientific reputation. Our journal publishes research papers, and we strongly believe that scientific credibility is our indispensable asset. The editorial staff members are guided in their work by the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics, and take into account the valuable experience of reputable international journals and publishers.

The editorial board of the “TATARICA” (hereinafter –the journal) makes every effort to comply with the ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community to prevent any violations of these rules. This policy is a prerequisite for our effective participation in the development of an integrated system of knowledge.

Duties of Authors

Requirements for publication of research results. The authors of papers, containing the results of original research, are required to submit a detailed report on the work done, as well as objective arguments in favor of its relevance. The article should include accurate data confirming the results obtained. The article should contain details and references necessary for confirmation of the work done. False representation of the facts is considered to be a violation of the code of ethics and is unacceptable. Reviews and professional articles should be objective and contain valid information. Papers, expressing "opinion of the editorial board" should be marked accordingly.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors of submitted papers should ensure that they have written entirely original work, and if the authors have used the work and / or words of other authors, it should be clearly identified by references or in the text.

Plagiarism takes many forms: from presenting someone else’s work for one’s own to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's work (without reference to the source), as well as claiming the rights to the results obtained in the studies carried out by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable in publications.

Submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

Authors should not submit for publication a previously published article.

The works of other researchers should be clearly identified. Authors should provide references to publications that have influenced the content of the submitted paper.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those individuals who have made significant contributions to the conception, planning, implementation or interpretation of the submitted research.

All those who have made significant contributions to the research 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 included in the list of contributors.

The author should list all appropriate co-authors and ensure that 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.

The article, if accepted for publication, is placed in the public domain, copyright reserved by the authors.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors should disclose any financial or other significant conflicts of interest that might be construed as affecting the results of the evaluation of the manuscript. Examples of possible conflicts of interest, subject to mandatory indication are: employment, advisory services, stock ownership, fee-paid expertise, patents, grants and other funding. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the Editor- in- Chief learns from a third party that the published work contains a significant error, it is the author’s obligation to promptly retract or correct the article, or present the evidence that the published work is correct.

Plagiarism

The editorial board commits itself to help the scientific community in implementation of publishing ethics, especially in cases of suspected duplicate article submission or plagiarism.

Duties of the Editor-in-Chief

These instructions correspond to the editorial policies and standards of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors).

Acceptance for Publication

The Editor-in Chief is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The decision is made basing on the credibility of the paper and its relevance for the readers.

The Editor- in- Chief may be guided by the methodological guidance developed by the editorial board and legal requirements such as the avoidance of libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

Also, in making this decision, the Editor- in- Chief may confer with other editors, members of the editorial board or the reviewers (or representatives of scientific and teaching staff).

Fair Play

The Editor-in- Chief evaluates the submitted papers for their intellectual content, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, nationality or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The Editor-in- Chief and any editorial staff member 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.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

• Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the written consent of the author.
• Confidential information, obtained in the review process, must not be disclosed or used for personal gain.
• The Editor- in -Chief, will waive the examination of the submitted paper in the presence of a conflict of interest arising out of competition, collaboration, or other kind of relationship with authors and organizations involved in this work (the editor can take over as the Editor-in- Chief).
• The Editor- in- Chief shall require all authors to provide information about the conflict of interests and publish corrections, if any show up after the publication of the paper. If necessary, more suitable actions can be performed, such as publishing a refutation or expressions of concern.
• The Editor-in- Chief should ensure the appropriateness of reviewing procedures with regard to the submitted articles.
• Unrefereed sections of the scientific journal should be clearly identified as such.

Ethics Related Complaints

The Editor- in- Chief should be reasonably quick in response to ethics related complaints concerning the submitted manuscript or published article, having contact with the members of the editorial board. The measures typically include notifying the author of the complaint and its consideration and, if necessary, further communication with relevant institutions and research organizations. In the case of confirmation of the validity of the complaint, the correction, retraction or other appropriate statement is published. Each ethics related complaint will be considered, even a few years after the publication.

Citation of the Journal

The Editor-in- Chief or executive editor under no circumstances should force the authors to quote one of the scientific journals published by KFU, as a necessary condition for the acceptance of the manuscript for publication. Any recommendations for citing a work should be based on its scientific merit and aim to improve the material presented. Members of the editorial board may recommend authors certain sources in the course of reviewing, but such recommendations cannot be reduced to the demand to quote one of scientific journals published by KFU.

Duties of Reviewers

Every paper is reviewed by a minimum of two experts, who have all the opportunity to make an impartial evaluation regarding the level and clarity of the material presented, its relevance to the subject remit of the journal, novelty and reliability of results.

A reviewer should

1.Test the paper for the appropriate subject scope.

2. Evaluate the scientific validity of the paper, and its topical importance.

3.Evaluate the scientific timeliness of the results of the research.

4. Specify the layout of the paper, the length of the paper on the whole, abstracts in Russian and English, a list of literature and references to it in the text, contact information about the authors and others.
5. Give a qualitative and / or quantitative evaluation of the material in the paper

– factual;

– illustrative.

6. Evaluate the completeness and accuracy of the data presented.
7. Evaluate the accuracy of the used definitions and wordings.
8. Evaluate the literary style of presentation.
9. Provide well-grounded conclusions about the article as a whole, the comments and, if necessary, recommendations how it could be improved.

Participation in Making Decisions about Publication

Reviewing procedure assists the editor in making editorial decisions about publication, if necessary, the Editor-in-Chief can communicate with the author. Peer review is an integral part of academic communication and a scientific basis of the method used in the journal. The editorial board shares the view of the scientific community that the researchers willing to publish their articles in the journals, published by KFU, must participate in peer reviewing.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except persons authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the author. 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 between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the written consent of the author. Confidential information, obtained in the review process, must not be disclosed or used for personal gain. The reviewer should waive the examination of the submitted paper in the presence of a conflict of interest arising out of competition, collaboration, or other kind of relationship with authors and organizations involved in this work.

Founder

• Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education “Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University”

Author fees

Publication in “Tatarica" is free of charge for all the authors.

The journal doesn't have any Article processing charges.

The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.

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

“Tatarica" 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

Prior to acceptance and publication in “Tatarica", authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.

As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in “Tatarica" we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.

Glossary (by SHERPA)

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, article processment charges.