The editorial council of the scientific journal "Christian Pilgrimage Review" in its activities is guided by international standards for the ethics of scientific publications. Decency and monitoring of the quality of published materials is carried out by the editorial board on the basis of the recommendations of the Committee on the Ethics of Scientific Publications (Committee on Publication Ethics).
​
The editors adhere to the principles of transparency in the selection of articles and the preservation of the reviewers' feedback confidentiality in order to avoid possible conflicts of interest.

Publication of the results of scientific research includes the consistent work of authors, editors and reviewers. The conscientious approach of three participants in the process of drafting articles can ensure high quality of publications, their relevance and innovative character.
​
Journal "Christian Pilgrimage Review" adheres to and encourages editors, authors and reviewers to adhere to best practices in the field of ethics of scientific publications (Policies and ethics) in order to avoid misuse and falsification of scientific research.
​
The journal is licensed under CC BY-NC Creative Commons, which allows you to copy and distribute journal articles in any medium or format.

LIABILITY OF AUTHORS

​
Authors offering to publish the results of their scientific research should realize that the publication of their manuscript proceeds from the fact of completeness of the research, its innovative nature and relevance both among scientists and society as a whole. Publications can be both new, previously unknown studies, and the search for new formulations of previously stated scientific problems that require an intensification of the efforts of the scientific community.
​

1. Studies should be conducted using methods known to science. If the author resorts to a personal method of research, he must describe it as fully as possible, so that this method of research is understandable to other scientists and readers. The article should contain enough information to verify the author's results.
2. The authors are responsible for the quality, reliability, completeness of the materials submitted. An indispensable responsibility of the authors is to ensure the accuracy of methods and results of scientific research. Borrowings without a source are regarded as plagiarism and qualify as unethical behavior, which is unacceptable.
3. The authors are obliged to honestly present the results of scientific research, avoid falsifying any part of their research. Scientific results should be presented clearly and unambiguously to allow understanding and use of their findings by other scientists.
4. Research should be complete, the authors should not omit inconvenient or contradictory results that have been achieved, even if they do not correspond to the point of view of authors, research sponsors and trends of a specific scientific direction. Persons and organizations that supported the research should not impose a ban on publication of scientific results that contradict their position.
5. If an error is found in the study, no matter at what stage of the publication the manuscript is located, the authors must immediately notify the editorial office thereof.
6. The authors are responsible for the accuracy of citing the works of other authors, bringing to them the references used in writing the article. Authors should not copy links from other publications. The citation of any research should be associated with personal work on the source.
7. Hypotheses, ideas, original formulations created by other authors should be quoted. It is not permissible to present the scientific results of other scientists as created independently.
8. New results should be presented in the context of previous studies by other scientists. Previous research should be given a fair assessment. Authors should refer to previous studies, regardless of whether they support their position or not. In the case of an expression of disagreement with the hypothesis cited, it is mandatory to present arguments justifying their disagreement.
9. Authors are obliged to submit for publication original research that has not been published in part or in whole, in other publications and in other languages. In the event that work in one form or another was published in print or electronic media, monographs, teaching aids or read at the conference, it is incumbent on the authors to inform the editorial board about it.
10. Printing of previously published works is possible in exceptional cases, the relevance of which should be clarified to the readers by the authors. If the research rights have been transferred to the research customer, the publisher or other persons, the authors are required to submit permission to publish.
11. Authors must comply with copyright laws of their state, the Russian Federation, international standards on the observance of copyright. Authors should indicate all co-authors who are involved in the study, to obtain their consent to publish the materials in the form submitted. The responsibility for the proper attribution of authorship lies with the author, who acts on behalf of the other co-authors.
12. The authors give the editorial board non-exclusive rights to translate his article into any languages, publish the original and translations in any form and distribute throughout the world. The editors have the right to transfer some of the rights received to third parties in order to distribute the article, but without prejudice to the interests of the author.
13. Obligatory in terms of scientific integrity is to bring an exhaustive list of individuals and organizations that have provided material or indirect support in launching and completing the research; It is important to disclose the role of sponsors.
14. Authors should cooperate with the editorial staff to correct published work if errors or omissions were discovered after publication.
15. Authors should respond appropriately to comments after publication. They should try to answer criticism and give explanations or additional details where necessary.
16. Authors should not submit the results of their research to more than one publisher at the same time.
17. The authors are obliged to notify the editors if they withdraw (withdraw) the manuscript from consideration.
18. Authors should not respond to the comments of the reviewer after receiving a recommendation for the publication of the manuscript with the condition of its preliminary correction.
19. At the request of the editorial staff, the authors must provide evidence that the results of the study were obtained ethically.
20. Authors should remember that the publication of personal information may be an interference with privacy. Identifying data can be published with the consent of the persons mentioned in the work or their relatives.
21. Authors should remember the moral responsibility for published research.

LIABILITY OF THE EDITORIAL

The editorial board of the magazine "Christian Pilgrimage Review" is striving to meet the world standards of publishing activity, presented to scientific journals.
​
The editors adhere to the international editorial ethics in matters of cooperation with authors, reviewers, the implementation of publications, the correctness and reliability of published materials.
​
The editorial board seeks maximum encouragement of authors to follow the high standards of manuscripts submitted for publication.
​
The editorial board considers itself as part of a large professional editorial community, is ready to cooperate with other publishers, for the sake of reliable reflection of ongoing scientific research in the thematic areas of the journal.

1. The editorial board of the magazine "Christian Pilgrimage Review" is responsible for the content of the magazine. Responsibility assumes the integrity of the articles, the conformity of their formulation with the unified international practice required for the quality of scientific publications. At all stages of the publication of articles, the editors require a high level of ethical behavior from all of their participants.
2. The editors are guided by the principles of making fair and unbiased decisions in the implementation of the publication. Defends the principles of editorial independence and consistency of editorial policy.
3. The editorial board does not take decisions on the basis of commercial or political considerations. In the selection of incoming materials, the editors are guided by the principles of academic dignity, editorial policy, recommendations of reviewers, the appropriateness of filling out the headings.
4. The editors show an active interest in cooperation with the authors in writing non-trivial articles. Research should be in demand in the scientific community and have innovative content. The editorial staff in every way seeks to encourage the authors to correct articles, according to the recommendations of the reviewers.
5. The editorial board does not charge a fee from the authors either for accepting the article for publication or for speeding up its publication.
6. The editorial board does not pay monetary fees.
7. The editorial staff of the magazine strives to become the leading publication in its subject area, to comply with international publishing standards.
8. Members of the Editorial Board and the International Editorial Board of the journal take part in the selection of publications, the editorial policy of the journal, the thematic content of the headings, act as reviewers, and affirm the seal of the next issue of the journal.
9. Members of the editorial boards of the journal should take an active part in the work and development of the journal, publish their own research, form the headings of the journal, attract leading world scientists to the publication.
10. The editorial board does not in any way seek to influence the rating of the magazine, artificially increasing its indicators; the editors regard the practice of requiring authors to bring references to the journal as unacceptable. Authors can not be subjected to pressure in order to indicate in the articles references to the journal or to the work of certain members of the editorial board.
11. The editorial board does not disclose information about authors and articles received from them to other editors. The editorial board preserves the confidentiality of the authors' names from reviewers to the final acceptance of the manuscript into print. The names of reviewers are not disclosed at all. The disclosure of the names of reviewers can only be done at the request of the reviewers themselves.
12. The editors encourage maximum openness and transparency in the promotion of knowledge contained in published scientific research conducted by the authors and printed on the pages of the journal, which is achievable due to the honesty, integrity and transparency of all participants in the publication.
13. The editorial staff has the right to request additional information from the authors on the scientific contribution of all co-authors, sources of funding, possible conflicts of interest. In exceptional cases, the editorial board has the right to require the written consent of the co-authors to publish the article in the form submitted to the publication.
14. The editors adhere to the principles of citing literature, which meets the criteria of scientific character. It is inadmissible in the article to cite sources that can not be regarded as those that helped make a contribution to the research topic.
15. The editors at all stages of reviewing articles conduct an analysis for the presence of plagiarism both using electronic means, for example, the system (https://antiplagiat.ru) and by involving a larger number of reviewers who are recognized scientists in the thematic headings of the journal. The editors pay special attention to the possibility of hiding plagiarism using special software.
16. Reaction to published research is an important part of the publication activity. The editorial board encourages discussion of published articles and seeks to ensure the possibility of priority publication of articles calling for controversy.
17. The editors ensure the storage of published articles and free access to their full content on the official website of the magazine. The editorial staff has the right to transfer the archive of the journal for storage to national and international bibliographic databases. The editorial board does not charge a fee for accessing the archive of publications.
18. In case of revealing significant errors that could be misleading concerning the results of the investigation or the detection of plagiarism, the editorial staff withdraws the published article.
19. The editors provide a high level of expert evaluation of the article, its unbiased nature, as well as timely receipt of the report from the reviewers. At the same time, the editorial board has the right to reject the article without sending it for review, which may be due to the discrepancy between the article and the editorial policy of the journal, the inadmissibility of the article for the readers of the journal, or the admittedly low quality of the article. In the case of the initial rejection of the article, the editors provide an exhaustive explanation of their decision.

RESPONSIBILITY OF REVIEWERS

1. Expert evaluation of the manuscript is the basis for the editorial decision on the scientific merit of the study. In case of discrepancies between the opinions of the editorial office and reviewers, the editorial board has the right to attract additional reviewers, which the author is notified about.
2. The editor-in-chief reviewer, who believes that his qualifications are not sufficient to conduct a full-fledged analysis of the manuscript, should notify the editorial office and refuse the review process.
3. The manuscript received from the editorial office is confidential. On the part of the reviewer, it is inadmissible to disclose its contents to other persons or to discuss the peer review process with other experts.
4. The response to the manuscript should be as objective as possible. It is inadmissible for the reviewer to back up criticism with a personal position. For any criticism, the reviewer must propose the necessary argument.
5. The reviewer should identify incorrect borrowing, the lack of properly issued quotes, and similarities with other works. Reviewers should not show any personal interest in the publication of the manuscripts in question.
6. The reviewer is obliged to indicate in the response the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript; if possible, help the author improve his manuscript. The reviewer should remember that the author's article carries the distinctive features of the author's style, the reviewer has no right to demand adherence to the style preferred by him.
7. Reviewers should not require the inclusion of references to their work in the article.

​

Procedures for Dealing with Unethical Behaviour

• 1. Identification of unethical behaviour

1.1. Misconduct and unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone.
​
1.2. Misconduct and unethical behaviour may include, but need not be limited to, examples as outlined in Publication ethics.
​
1.3. Whoever informs the editor or publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.
​

• 2. Investigation

​
2.1. An initial decision should be taken by the editor, who should consult with or seek advice from the publisher, if appropriate.

2.2. Evidence should be gathered, while avoiding spreading any allegations beyond those who need to know.

• 3. Minor breaches

3.1. Minor misconduct might be dealt with without the need to consult more widely. In any event, the author should be given the opportunity to respond to any allegations.

• 4. Serious breaches

4.1. Serious misconduct might require that the employers of the accused be notified. The editor, in consultation with the publisher or Society as appropriate, should make the decision whether or not to involve the employers, either by examining the available evidence themselves or by further consultation with a limited number of experts.

• 5. Outcomes (in increasing order of severity; may be applied separately or in conjunction)

5.1. Informing or educating the author or reviewer where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.

5.2. A more strongly worded letter to the author or reviewer covering the misconduct and as a warning to future behaviour.

5.3. Publication of a formal notice detailing the misconduct.

5.4. Publication of an editorial detailing the misconduct.

5.5. A formal letter to the head of the author’s or reviewer’s department or funding agency.

5.6. Formal retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the journal, in conjunction with informing the head of the author or reviewer’s department, Abstracting & Indexing services and the readership of the publication.

5.7. Imposition of a formal embargo on contributions from an individual for a defined period.

5.8. Reporting the case and outcome to a professional organisation or higher authority for further investigation and action.