INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS
The Editorial Office accepts the manuscripts in English language as followed:
Major articles and research reports: 5000-8000 words, including references, footnotes and appendixes
Essays/Overviews/Discussions: up to 3000 words, including references and footnotes;
Book reviews and news: up to 2000 words.
The texts should be written in Times New Roman, 12, 1.5 spacing. The text should include a title and information about the author and his/her institutional affiliation (maximally 7 lines). The texts of major articles and research reports should include abstracts (200-300 words) and 5-7 key words. All references should follow the APA Citation Manual. Illustrations, figures, diagrams, tables, photographs and the like should be mentioned in the text, named Fig. and numbered consecutively with Arabic numerals. They should be sent in a separate file.
The manuscripts should be submitted electronically in file formats .doc, .docx and .rtf as email attachments to email@example.com. The emails should include contacts on the authors. All the manuscripts are subjected to reviewing.
Deadline for submitting manuscripts for the next year issue: 30 March.
After the manuscript is submitted, the Editorial Office should confirm its receiving by email. All the manuscripts are reviewed by the editors who in course of two weeks would inform the authors about further procedure which can include modifications of the texts according to the editors’ comments. The Editorial Office does not accept the manuscripts which do not correspond to the yearbook’s scholarly orientation, do not answer the basic criteria of scholarly text, or are ethically challenging. Rejection of a manuscript should be approved by the Editorial Board.
The texts of major articles and research reports are thoroughly reviewed by two independent opponents. In this process the Editorial Office follows the rules of mutually anonymous peer reviewing. The reviewers should be competent in a relevant field of study. The editors also take in consideration personal or institutional issues that can influence the reviewers’ decisions.
The reviewers are asked to give opinion on scientific qualities of the text (argument, references, ethnographic data, originality, contribution to the field) and on formal aspects (language, writing style, quotations, format). If reviewers’ opinions radically differ, the editors ask a third scholar to review the paper in question.
On the basis of the reviews the manuscript is either accepted for publication, returned to the author for reworking or fully rejected. In case of reworking the editors are competent to consider whether the author’s modifications are sufficient. If they are considered to be insufficient, the editors can reject the article, but their decision should be approved by the Editorial Board. The Board also makes decision about terms of publishing the article.
If author objects against the decision of the Editorial Office or does not consider the reviewer’s comments to be relevant, they can explain their objections in a letter to the Editor in Chief. The reviewer, the editors and the Editorial Board should be informed about the letter and the Editorial Board should make the final decision.