Lobbying in the Legislative Process

RULES OF MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION FOR PUBLICATION IN THE JOURNAL "LOBBYING IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS"

The editorial policy of the Yur-VAK Publishing House follows the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications.

Manuscripts are accepted only in case if they are not currently considered for publication in another publishing house, have not been posted on the Internet and have not been published earlier, the author is responsible for the accuracy of this information.

• Authors warrant that their manuscripts are original work, free from plagiarism and unfair borrowing.
• Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
• Authors should clearly indicate all sources used in their text.
• The authors are responsible for the selection and accuracy of the information contained in the articles, citations, legal documents, and should not affect the honor, dignity and business reputation of third parties.
• Authors should report any errors they find in their manuscript after publication.

Completeness of the manuscript:

At the beginning of the article, the following information is indicated:

Author (s) data:

• surname, name, patronymic (in full) of the author
• job position
• academic title
• academic degree, place of work
• address of the place of work
• ORCID ID, Scopus Author ID, Researcher ID
• name of scientific specialization
• email
• telephone number

An example of the correct formatting of an article on the humanities (technical)

2. Title of the article (in Russian, in English)

3. Abstract (in Russian, in English) (150-200 words)

The abstract should be clearly structured and reflect the following aspects of the content of the article:

• Purpose of writing a research paper
• Conclusions obtained during the study
• We recommend, if possible, to include the main theses of the article in the form of infographics in the abstract (Highlights) Example of Highlights

4. 6-8 key-words in Russian and English (up to 100 characters with spaces).

5. Acknowledgments

6. The text of the article in the Word editor. The text of the article is not less than 4000-6000 words.

The structure of the text of the article should be highlighted with headings

• Introduction. Formulation of the problem

• Methods for solving the considered problem (for articles on technical sciences)

• Subject headings of the main logical sections of the article

• Conclusion

• Summary

Figures, graphs and tables must be provided in two languages: Russian and English; under the figure, graph, table, you must indicate the Source (in Russian, in English).

To design links to sources within the text of the article, we recommend authors to use the Harvard Style for links to sources within the text of the article (Harvard Style - name-date system: after the quoted phrase or link in quotation marks, to the author's opinion in brackets the surname of the author of the cited work and the year of its publication are indicated, and in the list of references the sources are indicated in alphabetical order) so that the information is more correctly displayed in international databases.

Links in the text are made in square brackets - the author's surname (without initials), year are indicated. If the link leads to a specific fragment of the text of the document, indicate the page number: [Ivanov, 2010: 60]. If the link contains information about several works, they are separated by a semicolon when specifying sources in the text of the article: [Ivanov, Sidorov, Latyshev, Year; Petrov, Year]

7. List of used literary sources (in Russian and English) in a single format, the names of the authors in alphabetical order.

• The number of cited publications is 15-20 sources published no later than 3-4 years

• The list of references contains the most significant articles and monographs on the research topic

• Normative documents are indicated in page references

• Textbooks, teaching aids, dictionaries are not recommended to be indicated in the list of references

• Internet links are recommended to be transferred to page references

• A sample of the design of a link in the list of references:

Ivanov I.I. Title of the article // Title of the journal. year. V. volume number. No. page number.

10. The volume of published materials is unlimited, font 14 (12), spacing 1.5

Peer-Review

Peer-reviewing of research papers submitted to “LOBBYING IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS” journal

The papers submitted to the editorial office of the “LOBBYING IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS” journal are to be obligatory peer-reviewed.

The peer-review includes the following steps:

1. Analysis of the paper compliance with the “Rules of manuscript submission for publication”. This analysis is performed by the Journal`s secretary within first three days after submission.

2. Peer review is performed by a specialist in the current research field, having a doctoral degree and no research or financial connection to the authors, or any other conflict of interest with the authors of the manuscript. The independent reviewer is selected by the editorial office. The peer-reviewing is a voluntary and confidential activity. Peer-reviewers are informed that the papers present an intellectual property of the authors and are a matter of non-disclosure. Peer-reviewers are prohibited of making copies of papers for private use. The case of suspicious non- reliable or probably falcified data should be reported to the Editorial officer. Corresponding author of the peer-reviewed paper is always familiarized with the text of the peer-review and the status of a lay-out of the article prior to confirming it for publication.

3. Paper analysis by the editorial board is performed for all submitted articles. The editor-in-chief confirms the list of articles for the next issue. The editor-in-chief is entitled to decline the article in the case of ignoring peer-reviewers comments by the authors or sent the manuscript for an extra peer-review. The editor-in-chief chooses extra peer-reviewers among the members of the editorial board or the editorial committee.

The duration of the peer-review is organized in a way to minimize the time of publication. The maximal duration of a peer-review is 1 month.

The final list of articles for the next issue is confirmed by the editor-in-chief after the lay-outing and before printing. The Editing officer makes the corresponding author familiar with the lay-out status of the article prior to author confirms the final text of the paper for publication. This is responsibility of the author to perform proper translation and check the English text after the editing when required.

The process of informing authors about the results of peer-review:
- after the positive peer-review the paper is entered in the line for publication according to the priority which is determined individually for each article. Peer- reviewers comments and information about the approximate time of publication are provided to the corresponding author upon request by email (urvak@urvak.ru);

• after the negative peer-review the reply of the reviewer and the decision to deny the publication are sent to the author;
• if the peer-review contains recommendations to correct some parts of the paper, the text of the article is sent to the author to make the corrections or/and reply the reviewer. In this case the date of the primary submission is registered as a submission date;
• in case of disagreement with the reviewer(s) the author has a right to provide the editorial office with a well-reasoned reply to a peer-review. Then the paper can be sent for an extra peer-review or becomes a subject of a discussion by the Editorial Board;
• the articles corrected by the authors are sent for a secondary peer-review. 

The following papers are not accepted for submission:

• non-compliant with the “Rules of manuscript submission for publication” if the authors decline to correct the technical errors.
• in case the authors do not support the comments of the peer-reviewers and do not provide any well-reasoned disproof.

The declined papers can be resubmitted to the journal for the general peer- review after the major revision. 

Publication Ethics Guidelines

Ethical code of the “LOBBYING IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS” journal

All the submitted papers are peer-reviewed by minimal 2 reviewers considering the originality, research content and ethical matters.

The compliance with the international ethical standards is of great significance for the all parties: authors, editors, reviewers, publishers.

The Editorial Board of Publishing house Yur-VAK commits to the internationally accepted principles of publication ethics expressed in the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Ethical Code of Academic Periodicals and takes into account the valuable experience of reputable international journals and publishers.

This code is based on the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publications of the Committee of publication ethics.

The obligations of the editorial board

1. A decision to accept the article for the submission.

1.1 The editorial board of the “LOBBYING IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS” journal is responsible for the scientific contents of the journal. This decision is based on the peer-reviews of the manuscripts.

1.2 The editorial board follows the publication code of the journal and the copyright legal issues. The editor-in-chief may include additional editors during the decision-making process.

2.Confidentiality

2.1. The members of the editorial office and reviewers are prohibited from disclaiming any information about the submitted paper and its content due to confidentiality (except the authors of the article, peer-reviewers, editorial members and publisher).

3. Disclosure and conflict of interests.

3.1. Non-published materials can not be used by the editorial office or the reviewers for a private use or for a transmission to a third party without a written author`s permission.

The obligations of the peer-reviewers

The peer-reviewers support the scientific editor in decision-making and support the author in improving the paper.

1. Confidentiality

1.1. The papers submitted to the editorial office are considered confidential matters. The submitted papers must not be disclosed to any third parties, except those confirmed by the editorial office.

2. Confirmation of information sources.

2.1 The papers published or to be published in other journals are not accepted. The description of any methods, scientific facts or discussions must be supported by the correct reference. The peer-reviewers are obliged to inform the editorial office about any plagiarism detected in the paper.

2.2 Peer-reviewers should identify non-referenced research work. Each earlier reported evidence should be accompanied by a reference. Peer-reviewer is obliged to report any plagiarism, multiple, excessive and competitive publications or double publications.

3. Disclosure and conflict of interests.

3.1 Any private information or ideas discussed during the peer-review are confidential and are matters of non-disclosure. The peer-reviewer is prohibited of reviewing the paper in case of any conflict of interest with any of the authors, industry or any other organizations related to the current paper.

The obligations of the authors

1. Originality of the data and plagiarism

1.1. The authors are obliged to guarantee the originality of the paper. Any data from the other papers or research works must be noted and referred to.

2. Access to data and its storage

2.1. The authors are obliged to present the data related to the current paper if possible. The authors must store the data related to the current paper as long as possible after the publication.

3. Multiple, excessive and competitive publications

3.1 Authors are prohibited from publishing the same papers or the papers describing the same data in multiple journals.

3.2 The submission of the same paper to multiple journals is unethical and unacceptable.

4. Confirmation of references

4.1 The authors are obliged to refer to the research papers they used during the preparation of the paper.

5. Authorship

5.1 The authorship of the paper must be limited to the persons who made a significant input into the concept, project, creation or interpretation of the data. Any other persons who made an input into some parts of the paper can be acknowledged.

5.2 The authors are obliged to guarantee that the list of the authors only contains people who made a significant input into the paper, and also that all the co-authors reviewed the paper, confirmed its final version and agreed to the publication.

6. Disclosure and conflict of interests.

6.1. All the authors and co-authors are obliged to disclose any financial or other conflict of interests, which may interfere with the results of the investigation.

7. Errors in the published papers

7.1 Authors are obliged to immediately address the editorial office in case of the detection of any errors or inaccuracies in the published paper.

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

The editorial board of the “LOBBYING IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS” journal use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.