Editorial Policies

Aims and Scope

The journal "News of Higher Education Institutions. Geology and Exploration" publishes articles containing the results of theoretical and experimental studies carried out in universities and research institutions, geological exploration enterprises, as well as on the personal initiative of the authors. Review articles covering the current state of topical issues in geological science and geological exploration practice, materials from scientific conferences, symposia and meetings are published. The journal promotes advanced production experience.

For more than 60 years of its activity, the journal "News of Higher Education Institutions. Geology and Exploration" has established itself as one of the leading and authoritative scientific periodicals in the field of Earth sciences. It effectively participates in solving scientific and technical problems, promotes the latest achievements and strengthens the authority of university and industry science in the field of geology, and contributes to improving the level of training of highly qualified engineering, scientific and teaching personnel. The editorial board and editorial staff set themselves the goal of improving the quality of the publication in accordance with the recommendations of the Higher Attestation Commission and the requirements of Russian and international standards.

 
 

Peer Review Process

All scientific articles submitted to the editorial board of the journal "News of Higher Educational Institutions. Geology and Exploration" undergo mandatory unilateral anonymous ("blind") peer review (the authors of the manuscript do not know the reviewers and receive a letter with comments signed by the responsible secretary). However, at the request of the reviewer and with his (her) written consent, the name of the reviewer may be communicated to the author of the article.

  1. Articles submitted to the editors undergo examination by highly qualified experts from among the members of the editorial board and/or external experts upon their referral.
  2. The choice of reviewer is the prerogative of the editors. When submitting an article submitted to the editors, editors may offer them a special form (questionnaire) prepared by the editorial board with a list of typical questions to the reviewer, facilitating a comprehensive characterization of the article by reviewers and the subsequent decision by the editorial board on the advisability of publishing the article.

The manuscript is sent for review to two experts in the given field of research, and based on the review results, the editorial board determines the further fate of the manuscript: acceptance for publication in the presented form, the need for revision, or rejection.

The review period is 2-4 weeks, but at the request of the reviewer it can be extended.

  1. Each reviewer has the right to refuse to review in the event of an obvious conflict of interest that affects the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials. Based on the results of the manuscript review, the reviewer makes recommendations on the further fate of the article (each reviewer's decision is substantiated):

the article is recommended for publication in its current form;

the article is recommended for publication after correcting the deficiencies noted by the reviewer;

the article requires additional review by another expert;

the article cannot be published in the journal.

  1. Upon receipt of reviews by the editors, one copy is sent to the author, the other is stored in the editorial office for 5 years.
  2. If the review contains recommendations for correcting and revising the article, the editorial board of the journal sends the author the text of the review with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them in a reasoned manner (partially or completely). Revision of the article should not take more than two months from the moment the e-mail message about the need to make changes is sent to the authors.
  3. The manuscript sent to the authors for revision based on the comments of the reviewers and editors is reviewed again, after which the editorial board again decides on its acceptability for publication. Returning the manuscript to the authors for revision does not mean that the article has been accepted for publication. After receiving the revised text, the manuscript is reviewed again by the editorial board. The author must return the revised text together with the original version of the article, as well as responses to all the reviewer's comments.
  4. Upon receipt of two negative reviews, the manuscript is finally rejected for publication.

8. Articles are published as they are received and the sections of the journal are filled. The order of publication is determined by the date of acceptance of the article for publication. Members of the editorial board have the right to recommend for accelerated publication articles that have received a high evaluation from reviewers and that have been classified by the editorial board as priority.

 

Publication Frequency

Quarterly. 100 copies.

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content based on the following principle: free open access to research results contributes to the global exchange of knowledge.

 

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).