RULES FOR THE ARTICLE

1. REQUIREMENTS FOR THE STRUCTURE OF THE ARTICLE

• Introduction. It should be short enough and not contain unnecessary information. In this section, it is appropriate to indicate why the study was conducted, what is the background and context of the issue under study, what terms and abbreviations will be used in the article;
• Methods. What exactly was undertaken to collect information, how exactly they were analyzed and presented. Here, it is also necessary to list the methods that were used for the study. If a new method was created for the work, it must be described in detail;
• Results. Presentation of new data that became available due to the study. The previous sections should describe the reasons and means that led the authors to certain results. The value of the article depends precisely on the content of this section. It also most often presents illustrative materials: tables, graphs and drawings, etc.;
• Discussion. The main goal of the section is to show why the results obtained are important and to convince the reader that the work carried out is valuable. Abstracts from the introduction and discussion should correspond to each other.

2. REQUIREMENTS FOR ARTICLE FORMATTING

11. 1. The volume of the article should be from 20 up to 40 thousand characters with spaces.
    2. Illustrative materials (drawings, graphs, diagrams) must be made using graphic electronic editors. These materials must be consecutively numbered and accompanied by an English translation. The volume of illustrative materials submitted should not exceed A4 format. The page must be in portrait orientation.
    3. Numerical data are drawn up in a table. Tables should not be bulky (no larger than A4, portrait orientation). Abbreviations of words in tables are not allowed, with the exception of units of measurement.
    4. The author must indicate the sources of all quotations, figures and other information provided in the article. References to sources are given in the main text in parentheses in the following form: author(s), year of publication: number of the cited page. Examples: (Ivanov, 2023:14), (Petrov, 2024:156-157). If the manuscript contains references to works by the same author published in the same year, the letters a, b, c, d... are added to the year of publication. When referring to several works by the same author, they are separated by commas. Example: (Sidorov, 2002, 2003, 2005).
    5. The main referencies list is compiled in accordance with the rules of the journal "Integral". The referencies in the list are arranged in alphabetical order.
    6. The referencies list may include the following types of sources:

• monographs;
• articles in a peer-reviewed academic journal;
• articles in the proceedings of the scientific-practical conference.
• Other sources (Internet sites, newspapers, legal documents, legal reference systems, articles without attribution) should be in the form of page footnotes or, as far as possible and legible, mentioned directly in the text.
  7. A mandatory requirement is the presence of DOI or EDN codes in each Russian-language source. For English-language sources, only the DOI code is required. The EDN code can be found on the publication description page of the eLibrary.
  8. In addition to the text of the article, the author submits in Russian and English:
• Abstract. Should correspond to the structure of the article and include sections: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. The volume of the abstract should be from 2 to 2.5 thousand characters. Its text should not repeat the title and text of the article. The abstract is intended to serve as a source of information independent of the article.
• Keywords. Keywords express the main semantic content of the article, serve as a guide for the reader and are used to search for articles in electronic databases, therefore they should reflect the field of science in which the article is written, the topic, purpose and object of study. Both single words and phrases in the singular and nominative case can be used as keywords. The recommended number of keywords is 6–9, the number of words within a key phrase is no more than three.
• Referencies list. Authors’ information as the following: full name (in full); IDs: ORCID (mandatory); AuthorID in the RISC, ScopusID, ResearcherID (Web of Science) (if available); place of work (study) and position held; academic degree, academic title; postal address of the place of work (study); e-mail.
  9. The responsibility for the accuracy of the specified information lies with the author of the article. Articles sent to the editor without fulfilling the requirements of these conditions of publication are not accepted.

Sample article design for publication in the journal «Integral»

1. 1. Publishing materials in peer-reviewed journals is not only a simple way of scientific communication, but also makes a contribution to the development of the relevant field of scientific knowledge. The journal sets standards for ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication, namely: Authors, Journal Editors, Reviewers, Publisher and Scientific Community for the journal «Integral».
   2. The publisher not only supports and invests in scientific communication, but is also responsible for ensuring that the published work adheres to all current publication standards.

1. 1. Publication decision

The editor of the scientific journal «Integral» is personally and independently responsible for making decisions about publication, often in collaboration with the relevant Scientific Community. The credibility of the work under review and its scientific significance should always form the basis of the decision to publish. The editor may be guided by the policies of the Editorial Board of the journal Integral, being limited by current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright, legality and plagiarism.
The Editor may confer with other Editors and Reviewers (or officials of the Scientific Community) when deciding to publish.

1. 2. Integrity
      The Editor must evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, citizenship or political preferences of the Authors.
   3. Confidentiality
      The Editor and the Editorial Board of the journal «Integral» are obliged not to unnecessarily disclose information about the accepted manuscript to all persons, with the exception of the Authors, Reviewers, possible Reviewers, other scientific consultants and the Publisher. Review is “blind”.
   4. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
      1. Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained during the review process related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

Editors should recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in the case of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other interactions and relationships with the Authors, companies and possibly other organizations associated with the manuscript.

1. 5. Oversight of Publications
      An editor who has been provided convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions presented in a publication is erroneous must report this to the Publisher (and/or the relevant Scientific Society) for the purpose of prompt notification of changes, withdrawal of publication, expression of concern, etc. statements appropriate to the situation.
   6. Research Involvement and Collaboration
      The Editor, together with the Publisher (or the Scientific Society), will take appropriate action to respond to ethical concerns regarding reviewed manuscripts or published materials. Such measures generally include interaction with the Authors of the manuscript and the argumentation of the relevant complaint or demand, but may also involve interaction with relevant organizations and research centers.

1. 1. Influence on Editorial Board Decisions
      Review helps the Editor make decisions about publication and, through appropriate interaction with Authors, can also help the Author improve the quality of the work. Peer review is a necessary link in formal scientific communication, located at the very “heart” of the scientific approach. The publisher shares the view that all scientists who wish to contribute to a publication are required to undertake the substantive work of reviewing the manuscript.
   2. Performance
      Any selected Reviewer who does not feel qualified to review a manuscript or does not have sufficient time to complete the work quickly must notify the Editor and request to be excluded from the review process of the relevant manuscript.
   3. Confidentiality
      Any manuscript received for review should be treated as confidential. This work must not be opened or discussed with any persons not authorized to do so by the Editor.
   4. Requirements for the manuscript and objectivity
      The reviewer is obliged to give an objective assessment. Personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their opinions clearly and with reason.
   5. Acknowledgment of Primary Sources
      Reviewers should identify relevant published work that is relevant to the topic and not included in the manuscript's bibliography. Any statement (observation, conclusion, or argument) previously published must have an appropriate bibliographic reference in the manuscript. The Reviewer should also bring to the Editor's attention any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published work within the Reviewer's area of expertise.
   6. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
      1. Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained during the review process related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
      2. Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts if there are conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative or other interactions or relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations associated with the submitted work.

1. 1. Requirements for manuscripts
      1. Authors of an article must provide reliable results of the work done, as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the study. The data underlying the work must be presented accurately. The work must contain sufficient detail and bibliographical references for possible reproduction. False or obviously erroneous statements are perceived as unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
      2. Reviews and scientific articles must also be reliable and objective.
   2. Data Access and Storage
      Authors may be requested to provide additional data relevant to the manuscript for review by the Editors. Authors should be willing to provide open access to this type of information (in accordance with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases) if feasible, and in any case be willing to retain these data for an adequate period of time after publication.
   3. Originality and plagiarism
      1. Authors must be responsible that the work they submit is original. When using the works or statements of others, Authors must provide appropriate bibliographical references or excerpts.
      2. Plagiarism can exist in many forms, from presenting someone else's work as original, to copying or paraphrasing significant parts of someone else's work (without attribution), to claiming rights to the results of someone else's research. Plagiarism in all forms is unethical and will not be tolerated.
   4. Multiplicity, redundancy and simultaneity of publications
      1. Authors should not publish a manuscript largely devoted to the same study in more than one journal as an original publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is perceived as unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
   5. Acknowledgment of Primary Sources
      Authors should cite publications that are relevant to the performance of the work presented. Data obtained in private, such as through conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties, should not be used or presented without the express written permission of the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources, such as manuscript evaluation or grant awards, should not be used without the express written permission of the Authors of the work related to confidential sources.
   6. Authorship of the publication
      The authors of the publication should be only persons who made a significant contribution to the formation of the concept of the work, development, execution or interpretation of the presented research. All those who have made significant contributions should be designated as Contributors. Where research participants have made significant contributions in a particular area of ​​the research project, they should be listed as significant contributors to that research.
   7. Significant and gross errors in published works
      After publishing an article on the journal’s website, if the Author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the publication, the Author must inform the Editor of the journal «Integral» about this and interact with the Editor in order to correct the errors as quickly as possible. Making editorial changes is considered an additional editorial service and is paid for by the author.
   8. If the Editor or Publisher has received information from the Author or a third party that the publication published in the RISC contains significant errors, there are significant borrowings from other sources (more than 25% plagiarism), the editors decide to withdraw the work (retraction) as soon as possible. In these cases, the cost of editorial services provided is not refundable. The editorial office does not provide services for making corrections to an article posted in the RSCI.

1. 1. The publisher follows principles and procedures that facilitate the fulfillment of ethical responsibilities by the Editors, Reviewers and Authors of the journal Integral in accordance with these requirements.
   2. The Publishing House provides support to the Editors of the Integral magazine in reviewing claims regarding the ethical aspects of published materials and helps to interact with other journals and/or Publishing Houses if this contributes to the performance of the duties of the Editors.

The assessment is performed by the Editor-in-Chief (Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Editor) during 3–5 days after the article is received by the Editorial Office. The initial assessment of the manuscript covers its compliance to the journal’s academic sphere and the rules of manuscript formatting listed in the “Manuscript guidelines” section.

The manuscripts not complying with the formatting rules will be rejected. The repeated submitting is possible after the manuscript is formatted in compliance with the journal’s requirements.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are checked for borrowings using the anti-plagiarism system. The share of the original text should not be less than 75%. In case of detection of incorrect and/or unduly formatted borrowings, the editorial board acts in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The manuscripts that correspond to the journal topic, are formatted in accordance with the “Manuscript guidelines” and do not contain incorrect and/or unduly formatted borrowings, are accepted for review.

All manuscripts accepted for review undergo a double blind review, which assumes that reviewers do not receive information about the author(s) of the manuscript, and the authors are not notified about who is reviewing their manuscript and receive the reviewers’ opinion from the journal Editorial Office.

The review procedure in the journal is focused on the maximally objective assessment of the manuscript content. Only those manuscripts that correspond to a high scientific level and are of value to the scientific community are accepted for publication.

The author of the manuscript receives electronic messages signed by the journal Editorial Office or the Editor-in-Chief (Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Editor).

1. 1. The articles reviewing is carried out by members of the Editorial Board, as well as invited reviewers – leading experts on the subject of the reviewed material who have published in this field over the past three years. The decision on the choice of a reviewer for the article expertise is made by the Editor-in-Chief (Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Editor). When choosing a reviewer, the Editorial Board takes into account potential conflicts of interests: for example, a supervisor (scientific consultant) of the author, a subordinate or employer of the author, a co-author of previous articles, a close relative of the author of the manuscript cannot become a reviewer.
   2. The articles reviewing is carried out on a voluntary and gratuitous basis. The journal Editorial Board uses a standard form when reviewing articles.
   3. Each article is sent to two reviewers. The review period is three weeks, but at the request of the reviewer it can be extended for two weeks. Each reviewer has the right to refuse a review if there is a possible conflict of interest affecting the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials.
   4. Based on the review results, the reviewer makes recommendations on the article (each decision of the reviewer must be justified):
      • accept the article for publication as submitted;
      • accept the article for publication after a minor revision and re-review;
      • accept the article for publication after a significant revision and re-review;
      • reject the article.
   5. Provided the review contains recommendations for correcting and modifying the article, the Editorial Board sends the reviewer's comments to the author with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the article or to (partially or completely) refute them giving one’s reasons. The article modified by the author is re-sent for review. The article revision should not take more than two weeks from the moment of sending an e-mail to the authors stating the need to make changes.
   6. If the authors refuse to modify the materials, they must notify the Editorial Board of their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version in four weeks from the date of sending the review, the Editorial Board removes it from the register, even if there is no information from the authors with a refusal to modify the article. In such cases, an appropriate electronic message shall be sent to the authors about the manuscript withdrawal from registration due to the revision term expiration.
   7. If the author and reviewers have unresolved contradictions regarding the manuscript, the Editor-in-Chief (Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Editor) is entitled to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief.
   8. The decision to reject the manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief in accordance with the reviewers’ recommendations. The article not recommended for publication is not accepted for reconsideration. In such cases, an appropriate electronic message about the refusal to publish shall be sent the authors.
   9. After receiving a positive opinion of the reviewers and the decision  to accept the manuscript for publication, the article is placed in the editorial portfolio for final processing. The authors are sent an appropriate electronic message about the acceptance of the manuscript with an indication of the publication dates. The Editorial Board has the right to negotiate the approval of the final version of the manuscript with the author(s).
   10. The positive opinion of a reviewer is not a sufficient reason for the article publication. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief.
   11. Reviews are kept in the journal Editorial Office for five years.
   12. The journal Editorial Board undertakes to send copies of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation upon receipt of a relevant request.

• Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
• Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

RULES FOR THE ARTICLE

1. REQUIREMENTS FOR THE STRUCTURE OF THE ARTICLE

• Introduction. It should be short enough and not contain unnecessary information. In this section, it is appropriate to indicate why the study was conducted, what is the background and context of the issue under study, what terms and abbreviations will be used in the article;
• Methods. What exactly was undertaken to collect information, how exactly they were analyzed and presented. Here, it is also necessary to list the methods that were used for the study. If a new method was created for the work, it must be described in detail;
• Results. Presentation of new data that became available due to the study. The previous sections should describe the reasons and means that led the authors to certain results. The value of the article depends precisely on the content of this section. It also most often presents illustrative materials: tables, graphs and drawings, etc.;
• Discussion. The main goal of the section is to show why the results obtained are important and to convince the reader that the work carried out is valuable. Abstracts from the introduction and discussion should correspond to each other.

2. REQUIREMENTS FOR ARTICLE FORMATTING

11. 1. The volume of the article should be from 20 up to 40 thousand characters with spaces.
    2. Illustrative materials (drawings, graphs, diagrams) must be made using graphic electronic editors. These materials must be consecutively numbered and accompanied by an English translation. The volume of illustrative materials submitted should not exceed A4 format. The page must be in portrait orientation.
    3. Numerical data are drawn up in a table. Tables should not be bulky (no larger than A4, portrait orientation). Abbreviations of words in tables are not allowed, with the exception of units of measurement.
    4. The author must indicate the sources of all quotations, figures and other information provided in the article. References to sources are given in the main text in parentheses in the following form: author(s), year of publication: number of the cited page. Examples: (Ivanov, 2023:14), (Petrov, 2024:156-157). If the manuscript contains references to works by the same author published in the same year, the letters a, b, c, d... are added to the year of publication. When referring to several works by the same author, they are separated by commas. Example: (Sidorov, 2002, 2003, 2005).
    5. The main referencies list is compiled in accordance with the rules of the journal "Integral". The referencies in the list are arranged in alphabetical order.
    6. The referencies list may include the following types of sources:

• monographs;
• articles in a peer-reviewed academic journal;
• articles in the proceedings of the scientific-practical conference.
• Other sources (Internet sites, newspapers, legal documents, legal reference systems, articles without attribution) should be in the form of page footnotes or, as far as possible and legible, mentioned directly in the text.
  7. A mandatory requirement is the presence of DOI or EDN codes in each Russian-language source. For English-language sources, only the DOI code is required. The EDN code can be found on the publication description page of the eLibrary.
  8. In addition to the text of the article, the author submits in Russian and English:
• Abstract. Should correspond to the structure of the article and include sections: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. The volume of the abstract should be from 2 to 2.5 thousand characters. Its text should not repeat the title and text of the article. The abstract is intended to serve as a source of information independent of the article.
• Keywords. Keywords express the main semantic content of the article, serve as a guide for the reader and are used to search for articles in electronic databases, therefore they should reflect the field of science in which the article is written, the topic, purpose and object of study. Both single words and phrases in the singular and nominative case can be used as keywords. The recommended number of keywords is 6–9, the number of words within a key phrase is no more than three.
• Referencies list. Authors’ information as the following: full name (in full); IDs: ORCID (mandatory); AuthorID in the RISC, ScopusID, ResearcherID (Web of Science) (if available); place of work (study) and position held; academic degree, academic title; postal address of the place of work (study); e-mail.
  9. The responsibility for the accuracy of the specified information lies with the author of the article. Articles sent to the editor without fulfilling the requirements of these conditions of publication are not accepted.

Sample article design for publication in the journal «Integral»

1. 1. Publishing materials in peer-reviewed journals is not only a simple way of scientific communication, but also makes a contribution to the development of the relevant field of scientific knowledge. The journal sets standards for ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication, namely: Authors, Journal Editors, Reviewers, Publisher and Scientific Community for the journal «Integral».
   2. The publisher not only supports and invests in scientific communication, but is also responsible for ensuring that the published work adheres to all current publication standards.

1. 1. Publication decision

The editor of the scientific journal «Integral» is personally and independently responsible for making decisions about publication, often in collaboration with the relevant Scientific Community. The credibility of the work under review and its scientific significance should always form the basis of the decision to publish. The editor may be guided by the policies of the Editorial Board of the journal Integral, being limited by current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright, legality and plagiarism.
The Editor may confer with other Editors and Reviewers (or officials of the Scientific Community) when deciding to publish.

1. 2. Integrity
      The Editor must evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, citizenship or political preferences of the Authors.
   3. Confidentiality
      The Editor and the Editorial Board of the journal «Integral» are obliged not to unnecessarily disclose information about the accepted manuscript to all persons, with the exception of the Authors, Reviewers, possible Reviewers, other scientific consultants and the Publisher. Review is “blind”.
   4. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
      1. Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained during the review process related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

Editors should recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in the case of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other interactions and relationships with the Authors, companies and possibly other organizations associated with the manuscript.

1. 5. Oversight of Publications
      An editor who has been provided convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions presented in a publication is erroneous must report this to the Publisher (and/or the relevant Scientific Society) for the purpose of prompt notification of changes, withdrawal of publication, expression of concern, etc. statements appropriate to the situation.
   6. Research Involvement and Collaboration
      The Editor, together with the Publisher (or the Scientific Society), will take appropriate action to respond to ethical concerns regarding reviewed manuscripts or published materials. Such measures generally include interaction with the Authors of the manuscript and the argumentation of the relevant complaint or demand, but may also involve interaction with relevant organizations and research centers.

1. 1. Influence on Editorial Board Decisions
      Review helps the Editor make decisions about publication and, through appropriate interaction with Authors, can also help the Author improve the quality of the work. Peer review is a necessary link in formal scientific communication, located at the very “heart” of the scientific approach. The publisher shares the view that all scientists who wish to contribute to a publication are required to undertake the substantive work of reviewing the manuscript.
   2. Performance
      Any selected Reviewer who does not feel qualified to review a manuscript or does not have sufficient time to complete the work quickly must notify the Editor and request to be excluded from the review process of the relevant manuscript.
   3. Confidentiality
      Any manuscript received for review should be treated as confidential. This work must not be opened or discussed with any persons not authorized to do so by the Editor.
   4. Requirements for the manuscript and objectivity
      The reviewer is obliged to give an objective assessment. Personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their opinions clearly and with reason.
   5. Acknowledgment of Primary Sources
      Reviewers should identify relevant published work that is relevant to the topic and not included in the manuscript's bibliography. Any statement (observation, conclusion, or argument) previously published must have an appropriate bibliographic reference in the manuscript. The Reviewer should also bring to the Editor's attention any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published work within the Reviewer's area of expertise.
   6. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
      1. Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained during the review process related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
      2. Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts if there are conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative or other interactions or relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations associated with the submitted work.

1. 1. Requirements for manuscripts
      1. Authors of an article must provide reliable results of the work done, as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the study. The data underlying the work must be presented accurately. The work must contain sufficient detail and bibliographical references for possible reproduction. False or obviously erroneous statements are perceived as unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
      2. Reviews and scientific articles must also be reliable and objective.
   2. Data Access and Storage
      Authors may be requested to provide additional data relevant to the manuscript for review by the Editors. Authors should be willing to provide open access to this type of information (in accordance with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases) if feasible, and in any case be willing to retain these data for an adequate period of time after publication.
   3. Originality and plagiarism
      1. Authors must be responsible that the work they submit is original. When using the works or statements of others, Authors must provide appropriate bibliographical references or excerpts.
      2. Plagiarism can exist in many forms, from presenting someone else's work as original, to copying or paraphrasing significant parts of someone else's work (without attribution), to claiming rights to the results of someone else's research. Plagiarism in all forms is unethical and will not be tolerated.
   4. Multiplicity, redundancy and simultaneity of publications
      1. Authors should not publish a manuscript largely devoted to the same study in more than one journal as an original publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is perceived as unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
   5. Acknowledgment of Primary Sources
      Authors should cite publications that are relevant to the performance of the work presented. Data obtained in private, such as through conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties, should not be used or presented without the express written permission of the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources, such as manuscript evaluation or grant awards, should not be used without the express written permission of the Authors of the work related to confidential sources.
   6. Authorship of the publication
      The authors of the publication should be only persons who made a significant contribution to the formation of the concept of the work, development, execution or interpretation of the presented research. All those who have made significant contributions should be designated as Contributors. Where research participants have made significant contributions in a particular area of ​​the research project, they should be listed as significant contributors to that research.
   7. Significant and gross errors in published works
      After publishing an article on the journal’s website, if the Author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the publication, the Author must inform the Editor of the journal «Integral» about this and interact with the Editor in order to correct the errors as quickly as possible. Making editorial changes is considered an additional editorial service and is paid for by the author.
   8. If the Editor or Publisher has received information from the Author or a third party that the publication published in the RISC contains significant errors, there are significant borrowings from other sources (more than 25% plagiarism), the editors decide to withdraw the work (retraction) as soon as possible. In these cases, the cost of editorial services provided is not refundable. The editorial office does not provide services for making corrections to an article posted in the RSCI.

1. 1. The publisher follows principles and procedures that facilitate the fulfillment of ethical responsibilities by the Editors, Reviewers and Authors of the journal Integral in accordance with these requirements.
   2. The Publishing House provides support to the Editors of the Integral magazine in reviewing claims regarding the ethical aspects of published materials and helps to interact with other journals and/or Publishing Houses if this contributes to the performance of the duties of the Editors.

The assessment is performed by the Editor-in-Chief (Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Editor) during 3–5 days after the article is received by the Editorial Office. The initial assessment of the manuscript covers its compliance to the journal’s academic sphere and the rules of manuscript formatting listed in the “Manuscript guidelines” section.

The manuscripts not complying with the formatting rules will be rejected. The repeated submitting is possible after the manuscript is formatted in compliance with the journal’s requirements.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are checked for borrowings using the anti-plagiarism system. The share of the original text should not be less than 75%. In case of detection of incorrect and/or unduly formatted borrowings, the editorial board acts in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The manuscripts that correspond to the journal topic, are formatted in accordance with the “Manuscript guidelines” and do not contain incorrect and/or unduly formatted borrowings, are accepted for review.

All manuscripts accepted for review undergo a double blind review, which assumes that reviewers do not receive information about the author(s) of the manuscript, and the authors are not notified about who is reviewing their manuscript and receive the reviewers’ opinion from the journal Editorial Office.

The review procedure in the journal is focused on the maximally objective assessment of the manuscript content. Only those manuscripts that correspond to a high scientific level and are of value to the scientific community are accepted for publication.

The author of the manuscript receives electronic messages signed by the journal Editorial Office or the Editor-in-Chief (Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Editor).

1. 1. The articles reviewing is carried out by members of the Editorial Board, as well as invited reviewers – leading experts on the subject of the reviewed material who have published in this field over the past three years. The decision on the choice of a reviewer for the article expertise is made by the Editor-in-Chief (Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Editor). When choosing a reviewer, the Editorial Board takes into account potential conflicts of interests: for example, a supervisor (scientific consultant) of the author, a subordinate or employer of the author, a co-author of previous articles, a close relative of the author of the manuscript cannot become a reviewer.
   2. The articles reviewing is carried out on a voluntary and gratuitous basis. The journal Editorial Board uses a standard form when reviewing articles.
   3. Each article is sent to two reviewers. The review period is three weeks, but at the request of the reviewer it can be extended for two weeks. Each reviewer has the right to refuse a review if there is a possible conflict of interest affecting the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials.
   4. Based on the review results, the reviewer makes recommendations on the article (each decision of the reviewer must be justified):
      • accept the article for publication as submitted;
      • accept the article for publication after a minor revision and re-review;
      • accept the article for publication after a significant revision and re-review;
      • reject the article.
   5. Provided the review contains recommendations for correcting and modifying the article, the Editorial Board sends the reviewer's comments to the author with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the article or to (partially or completely) refute them giving one’s reasons. The article modified by the author is re-sent for review. The article revision should not take more than two weeks from the moment of sending an e-mail to the authors stating the need to make changes.
   6. If the authors refuse to modify the materials, they must notify the Editorial Board of their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version in four weeks from the date of sending the review, the Editorial Board removes it from the register, even if there is no information from the authors with a refusal to modify the article. In such cases, an appropriate electronic message shall be sent to the authors about the manuscript withdrawal from registration due to the revision term expiration.
   7. If the author and reviewers have unresolved contradictions regarding the manuscript, the Editor-in-Chief (Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Editor) is entitled to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief.
   8. The decision to reject the manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief in accordance with the reviewers’ recommendations. The article not recommended for publication is not accepted for reconsideration. In such cases, an appropriate electronic message about the refusal to publish shall be sent the authors.
   9. After receiving a positive opinion of the reviewers and the decision  to accept the manuscript for publication, the article is placed in the editorial portfolio for final processing. The authors are sent an appropriate electronic message about the acceptance of the manuscript with an indication of the publication dates. The Editorial Board has the right to negotiate the approval of the final version of the manuscript with the author(s).
   10. The positive opinion of a reviewer is not a sufficient reason for the article publication. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief.
   11. Reviews are kept in the journal Editorial Office for five years.
   12. The journal Editorial Board undertakes to send copies of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation upon receipt of a relevant request.

4 issues per year

• Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
• Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

The journal complies with the principles of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), therefore the articles of the journal are available in open access pursuant to the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0). The author's rights for a scientific article belong to the author (s) of this article

Abasova A M GAOU VO «DGINH»

Abdieva Lazzat Karaganda Technical University named after Abylkas Saginov

Abdullina R I Sterlitamakskiy filial BashGU

Abubakarov Magomed Abdullaevich assistant of the Chair «Finance and credit», FGBOU VO «Chechen State University», Russia, Grozny

Abubakarov Magomed Abdullaevich assistant of the Chair «Finance and credit», FGBOU VO «Chechen State University», Russia, Grozny

Agafonova Anastasia Sergeevna Federal state budgetary educational institution of higher education «Vyatka state University»

Agafonova Anastasia Sergeevna Federal state budgetary educational institution of higher education «Vyatka state University»

Aduev I S FGBOU VO «Dagestanskiy GAU imeni M.M. Dzhambulatova

Aduev I S FGBOU VO «Dagestanskiy GAU imeni M.M. Dzhambulatova

Ayrapetov Dmitriy Tashkent State Transport University

Akbarov Abduvoris Tashkent State Economic University
student

Akimov A A Sterlitamakskiy filial BashGU

Akimov A A Sterlitamakskiy filial BashGU

Akimov A A Sterlitamakskiy filial BashGU

Akimov Igor Kamoevich First Saint Petersburg state medical University. Akad. I. P. Pavlov

Akpasov Anton «Volga Research Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Land Reclamation» (starshiy nauchnyy sotrudnik, zaveduyuschiy otdelom orositel'nyh sistem i gidrotehnicheskih sooruzheniy)
candidate of technical sciences

Akpasov Pavel Saratov State University of Genetics, Biotechnology and Engineering named after N.I. Vavilov
student

Aliev Rizvan Idrisovich assistant of the Chair «Business Informatics», FGBOU VO «Chechen State University»

Aliev Rizvan Idrisovich assistant of the Chair «Business Informatics», FGBOU VO «Chechen State University»

Aliyarova Sh T FGBOU VO «DagGAU imeni M. M. Dzhambulatova»

• « 
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• …
• 29
•  »

VAC