Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

EUREKA: Social and Humanities is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal devoted to research in the social sciences and humanities.

EUREKA: Social and Humanities includes subjects related to the study of social relations in different spheres of life. Authors in the materials should use a systematic approach, involving allied sciences and pointing to possible areas of application of the results of their research.

EUREKA: Social and Humanities publishes articles of theoretical and empirical character, reviews, as well as findings of research carried out within the scope of contemporary social science and humanities. The contributors represent a wide range of academic disciplines: sociology, philosophy, religious studies, cultural studies, anthropology, educational studies, psychology, political science, literature, linguistics, low and history.

EUREKA: Social and Humanities accepts articles only in English.

 

Section Policies

Arts and Humanities

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Blockchain

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Business, Management and Accounting

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Decision Sciences

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Economics, Econometrics and Finance

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Language and Linguistics

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Psychology

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Social Sciences

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Law

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Philology

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

The editorial board practices double-blind peer review.

 

Publication Frequency

The journal is published bimonthly.

 

Open Access Policy

Journal "EUREKA: Social and Humanities" is an open access journal. All articles are free for users to access, read, download, and print.

 

Archiving

This journal uses LOCKSS system for distributed archiving published content in multiple libraries and information centers. Library - project LOCKSS ensure long-term storage of comprehensive log files and automatically restoring damaged information.

 

Ethic norms of publication

Ethical Obligations of Editors 

1. All submitted materials are carefully selected and reviewed. An editorial board reserves the right to reject an article or return it as requiring improvement. The author is obliged to improve the article according to the remarks of the reviewers and the editorial board.

2. An editor should considerate all manuscripts offered for publication without prejudice, evaluating each on its merits without regard to race, religion, nationality, status, or institutional affiliation of the author(s). 3. An editor should consider manuscript submitted for publication without delays.

4. The whole responsibility for acceptance or rejection of an article rests with the editor. Responsible and reasonable approach to the duty requires that the editor seek advice from reviewers, Doctor of Science of required specialty, as to the quality and reliability of manuscripts submitted for publication. However, manuscripts may be rejected without external review if considered by the Editors to be inappropriate for the journal.

5. The editor and members of the editor’s staff should not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than those from whom professional advice is sought. After a positive decision has been made about a manuscript, it should be published in the journal and in the website of the journal.

6. An editor should respect the intellectual independence of authors.

7. Editorial responsibility and authority for any manuscript authored by an editor and submitted to the editor’s journal should be delegated to other qualified person, such as a member of its Editorial Board.

8. If an editor is presented with convincing evidence that the main substance or conclusions of a report published in an editor’s journal are erroneous, the editor should facilitate publication of an appropriate report pointing out the error and, if possible, correcting it. The report may be written by the person who discovered the error or by an original author.

9. An author may request that the editor not use certain reviewers in consideration of a manuscript. However, the editor may decide to use one or more of these reviewers, if the editor feels their opinions are important in the fair consideration of a manuscript. This might be the case, for example, when a manuscript seriously disagrees with the previous work of a potential reviewer.

 

Ethical Obligations of Authors

1. Main duty of an author is to present an accurate account of the research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance.

2. An author should be aware that journal space is a limited resource and should use it wisely and economically.

3. A primary research report should contain sufficient detail and reference to public sources of information to permit the author’s peers to repeat the work. When requested, the authors should make a reasonable effort to provide samples of unusual materials unavailable elsewhere, with appropriate material transfer agreements to restrict the field of use of the materials so as to protect the legitimate interests of the authors.

4. An author should cite those publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work and that will guide the reader quickly to the earlier work that is essential for understanding the present investigation. Except in a review, citation of work that will not be referred to in the reported research should be minimized. An author is obligated to perform a literature search to find, and then cite, the original publications that describe closely related work. For critical materials used in the work, proper citation to sources should also be made when these were supplied by a non author.

5. Any unusual hazards appearing during an investigation should be clearly identified in a manuscript reporting the work.

6. Fragmentation of research reports should be avoided. A scientist who has done extensive work on a system or group of related systems should organize publication so that each report gives a well-rounded account of a particular aspect of the general study.

7. In submitting a manuscript for publication, an author should inform the editor of related manuscripts that the author has under editorial consideration or in press. Copies of those manuscripts should be supplied to the editor, and the relationships of such manuscripts to the one submitted should be indicated.

8. It is improper for an author to submit manuscripts describing essentially the same research to more than one journal of primary publication, unless it is a resubmission of a manuscript rejected for or withdrawn from publication. It is generally permissible to submit a manuscript for a full paper expanding on a previously published brief preliminary account (a “communication” or “letter”) of the same work. However, at the time of submission, the editor should be made aware of the earlier communication, and the preliminary communication should be cited in the manuscript.

9. An author should identify the source of all information quoted or offered, except that which is common knowledge. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, should not be used or reported in the author’s work without explicit permission from the investigator with whom the information originated. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, should be treated similarly.

10. An experimental or theoretical study may sometimes justify criticism, even severe criticism, of the work of another scientist. When appropriate, such criticism may be offered in published papers. However, in no case is personal criticism considered to be appropriate.

11. The co-authors of a paper should be all those persons who have made significant scientific contributions to the work reported and who share responsibility and accountability for the results. Other contributions should be indicated in a footnote or an “Acknowledgments” section. An administrative relationship to the investigation does not of itself qualify a person for co-authorship (but occasionally it may be appropriate to acknowledge major administrative assistance). Deceased persons who meet the criterion for inclusion as co-authors should be so included, with a footnote reporting date of death. No fictitious name should be listed as an author or coauthor. The author who submits a manuscript for publication accepts the responsibility of having included as co-authors all persons appropriate and none inappropriate. The submitting author should have sent each living co-author a draft copy of the manuscript and have obtained the co-author’s assent to co-authorship of it.

12. The authors should reveal to the editor and to the readers of the journal any potential and/or relevant competing financial or other interest that might be affected by publication of the results contained in the authors’ manuscript. All authors should not have any personal significant financial interest and employment or other relationship with entities that have a financial or other interest which can affect the results described by the manuscript.

 

Ethical Obligations of Reviewers of Manuscripts

1. As the reviewing of manuscripts is an essential step in the publication process, and therefore in the operation of the scientific method, every scientist has an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

2. A chosen reviewer who feels inadequately qualified to judge the research reported in a manuscript should return it promptly to the editor.

3. A reviewer of a manuscript should judge objectively the quality of the manuscript, of its experimental and theoretical work, of its interpretations and its exposition, with due regard to the maintenance of high scientific and literary standards. A reviewer should respect the intellectual independence of the authors.

4. A reviewer should be sensitive to the appearance of a conflict of interest when the manuscript under review is closely related to the reviewer’s work in progress or published. If in doubt, the reviewer should return the manuscript promptly without review, advising the editor of the conflict of interest.

5. A reviewer should not evaluate a manuscript authored or co-authored by a person with whom the reviewer has a personal or professional connection if the relationship would bias judgment of the manuscript.

6. A reviewer should treat a manuscript sent for review as a confidential document. It should neither be shown to nor discussed with others except, in special cases, to persons from whom specific advice may be sought; in that event, the identities of those consulted should be disclosed to the editor.

7. Reviewers should explain and support their judgments adequately so that editors and authors may understand the basis of their comments. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Unsupported assertions by reviewers (or by authors in rebuttal) are of little value and should be avoided.

8. A reviewer should be alert to failure of authors to cite relevant work by other scientists, bearing in mind that complaints that the reviewer’s own research was insufficiently cited may seem self-serving. A reviewer should call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity between the manuscript under consideration and any published paper or any manuscript submitted concurrently to another journal.

9. A reviewer should act promptly, submitting a report in a timely manner.

10. Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations contained in a manuscript under consideration, except with the consent of the author. If this information indicates that some of the reviewer’s work is unlikely to be profitable, the reviewer, however, could ethically discontinue the work.

 

Indexing

1. Index Copernicus Journals Master List is a scientific journal database that contain currently over 13,000 journals from all over the world. This database covers all fields of science. Registered journals undergo rigorous, multidimensional evaluation, proving high quality. Appreciation to the IC Journals Master List expressed the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Poland by placing the database of scientific journals IC Journals Master List to the list of databases for indexing in which, periodicals receive additional points in the evaluation conducted by the Ministry (link)


2. CrossRef (included in 2016) is an association of scholarly publishers that develops shared infrastructure to support more effective scholarly communications. Our citation-linking network today covers over 68 million journal articles and other content items (books chapters, data, theses, technical reports) from thousands of scholarly and professional publishers around the globe (link)


3. Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online academic journals and books, conference papers, theses and dissertations, preprints, abstracts, technical reports, and other scholarly literature, including court opinions and patents (link)

width="225"


4. WorldCat - the world's largest bibliographic database, with over 240 million records of all kinds of products for 470 languages. Base is created by joint efforts of more than 72 thousand libraries in 170 countries across the organization Online Computer Library Center (link)

worldcat


5. Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is website that lists open access journals and is maintained by Infrastructure Services for Open Access (IS4OA). The project defines open access journals as scientific and scholarly journals that meet high quality standards by exercising peer review or editorial quality control and "use a funding model that does not charge readers or their institutions for access" (link)


6. International Institute of Organized Research (I2OR) has been established to promote various domains related to Education and Research around the globe to make it easily accessible and more organized (link)


7. ResearchBib - international multi-disciplinary database of scholarly journals, including a description of the log more than 5,400 publishers (link)

RB


8. MIAR – Information Matrix for the Analysis of Journals. MIAR collects data for the identification and the analysis of scientific journals . If you enter an ISSN in the searchbox , the system will check in which databases, those referred to in the matrix, the journal is indexed. The system holds more than 40,000 publications. It was founded in Barcelona, Spain (link)

9. 1findr – platform aiming to index articles in all peer-reviewed journals, in all fields of research, in all languages and from all over the world (link)


10. Ulrich's Periodicals Directory subscription catalog of American publishing Bowker, is the largest database that describes the global flow of periodicals in all subject areas (link)


11. Neliti is a research repository that helps researchers and decision makers in Indonesia find research, data and evidence (link)


12. BASE - search engine, which is one of the most powerful suppliers of actual data on the scientific publications of European scientists (link)



13. Directory of Open Access scholarly Resources (ROAD) is a service offered by the ISSN International Centre with the support of the Communication and Information Sector of UNESCO (link)


14. Scientific Indexing Services (SIS) – focuses on : citation indexing, citation analysis, and maintains citation databases covering thousands of academic journals. SIS Provides Quantitative And Qualitative Tool For Ranking, Evaluating And Categorizing The Journals For Academic Evaluation And Excellence (link)


15. Semantic Scholar is a project developed at the Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence, it is designed to be an AI-backed search engine for scientific journal articles (link)


16. CORE (COnnecting REpositories is aggregate all open access content distributed across different systems, such as repositories and open access journals, enrich this content using text mining and data mining, and provide free access to it through a set of services (link)

width="225"


17. JournalTOCs is the largest, free collection of scholarly journal Tables of Contents (TOCs): is for researchers, students, librarians and anyone looking for the latest scholarly articles (link)

width="225"


18. WorldWideScience.org is a global science gateway - accelerating scientific discovery and progress through a multilateral partnership to enable federated searching of national and international scientific databases and portals (link)


19. OpenAIRE is the European Research Information system that encompasses all research and enables ready-made reporting, monitoring and analysis. OpenAIRE link research outcomes (e.g., publications, data, software) to their creators (e.g., researchers, institutions, funders), enabling discoverability, transparency, reproducibility and quality-assurance of research (link)

width="225"


20. Zeitschriftendatenbank (ZDB) is one of the world’s largest databases for journals, newspapers, monographic series and other serial publications from all countries, in all languages, without time restrictions, in printed, electronic or digitised form (link)


21. EconBiz is a subject portal for economics and business studies. It is provided by the German National Library of Economics – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (ZBW) (link)

width="225"


22. Scilit is a comprehensive, free database for scientists using a new method to collate data and indexing scientific material. This database of scholarly works is developed and maintained by the open access publisher MDPI (link)


23. Dimensions is a dynamic, easy to use, linked-research data platform that re-imagines the way research can be discovered, accessed and analyzed (link)


24. Socionet is a data aggregator that forms a virtual scientific environment in the spirit of Open Science for creating and using information resources and services addressed to professional scientific communities (link)

width="225"


25. Scholarly Citation Index Analytics (SCIA) provides transformative repository based library and indexing services, extended through external collaborations, that amplify the impact of research and basic literature based evaluations in developing research community (link)


26. EconPapers  is a database of scholarly works, which provides access to the largest collection of online Economics working papers and journal articles (link)


27. PhilPapers  is an international, interactive academic database of journal articles for professionals and students in philosophy (link)


28. IDEASis a largest bibliographic database dedicated to Economics. Based on RePEc (Research Papers in Economics), it indexes over 2,800,000 items of research, including over 2,600,000 that can be downloaded in full text (link)
width="225"


29. Julkaisufoorumi is a classification of publication channels created by the Finnish scientific community to support the quality assessment of academic research (link


width="225"

 

Plagiarism and duplicate publication

Plagiarism is unacknowledged copying or an attempt to misattribute original authorship, whether of ideas, text or results. Plagiarism can be said to have clearly occurred when large chunks of text have been cut-and-pasted without appropriate and unambiguous attribution. Such manuscripts would not be considered for publication in journal «EUREKA: Social and Humanities». "Text recycling" or reuse of parts of text from an author's previous research publication is a form of self-plagiarism.

Duplicate publication occurs when an author reuses substantial parts of his or her own published work without providing the appropriate references. This can range from publishing an identical paper in multiple journals, to only adding a small amount of new data to a previously published paper.

Journal «EUREKA: Social and Humanities» editors assess all such cases on their individual merits. When plagiarism becomes evident post-publication, we may correct or retract the original publication depending on the degree of plagiarism, context within the published article and its impact on the overall integrity of the published study.

Material submitted to a «EUREKA: Social and Humanities» journal must be original and not published or submitted for publication elsewhere. This rule applies to material submitted elsewhere while the «EUREKA: Social and Humanities» journal contribution is under consideration.

All manuscripts submitted for consideration to the journal “EUREKA: Social and Humanities” are checked for uniqueness by specialized service iThenticate. A manuscript can be accepted for consideration only if it is unique at least 80%.

Also, in addition, the uniqueness of the manuscript is evaluated at the stage of double-blind peer review (as one of the criteria that is evaluated by reviewers).

If the manuscript was also submitted for consideration in another journal, the authors are required to report this when submitting the manuscript to the journal «EUREKA: Social and Humanities».

 

Author fees

Publication fee is:

  • 100.00 Euro (publication of an article of 8-12 pages, designed according to the requirements for articles)
  • 150.00 Euro (publication of an article of 8-12 pages, designed according to the requirements for articles + printed copy of the journal)
  • the cost of one additional page, designed according to the requirements of the journal, is 5.00 Euro.