- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Peer Review Process
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Indexation
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
- » Artificial Intelligence (AI) policy of the “Scientific and technical libraries” journal
Aim and Scope
The aim of our journal is to inform LIS professionals on basic trends, and to share experiences. We describe activities of libraries, as well as information services, HE institutions of Arts and Culture, the publishers and book trade organizations. We clarify information technologies problems, personnel training, the theory and methods of library science and book science. Our concept supposes publishing of analytical reviews, references and comments of professional publications, publishing of norms and directives concerning LIS activity.
Section Policies
Open Submissions Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Peer Review Process
1. The Journal Scientific and technical libraries” (“Journal”) send for review every submitted article within the Journal subject scope.
2. The Journal Editor-in-Chief makes the decision on which reviewers to send an article for review.
3. The Journal Editorial Board members are the main reviewers.
4. The Editorial Board resolve on the engagement of outsource reviewers which composition may be extended wherever necessary.
5. Double blind peer-review process is provided:
The papers are sent to reviewers without specifying author(s) name (s) or other identifying data; the review copy (if demanded by an author) shall not disclose reviewer’s name, organization, or signature.
6. Members of the Editorial Board, Editorial Council and outsource experts in corresponding areas of library and information sciences with an academic degree and publications on the subject within the recent 3-year period, may review the submitted articles. .
7. Every submitted article is sent to three reviewers for review. The Editor-in-Chief may take a decision to send a manuscript for additional review.
8. Timeframe for peer reviews falls within one to three weeks.
9. The Journal publish only original papers never published before. Upon the decision of the Editorial Board, an article of special relevance published in a foreign or international journal or in conference proceedings may be published in the Journal in the Russian language provided that author’s, rightholder’s, founder’s or publishers’ consent for publication is received.
10. Adherence to review ethics:
Reviewer shall report on the conflict of interests (if any) before reviewing: s/he shall not conclude on the quality of the submitted article based on his/her personal attitude toward an author, shall not disclose content to a third party and/or use it in personal interests. Reviewer should remain respectful and mindful in his/her language.
11. Upon the review completion, reviewer shall provide further sound recommendations:
- the article is recommended for publication
- the article is recommended for publication after the author addresses reviewer’s concerns and refines his/her article;
- the article may not be published in the Journal.
12. Recommendations on refining are to be sent to the author who is to address them when preparing a new version of the article, or to reject them (fully or in part) in a well-argued manner. The author shall submit the revised version within two weeks upon the notification of revision. The refined article is submitted for re-review.
13. In case of the discontent with reviewer’s comments, an author may withdraw his/her article by notifying the editorial staff in written and by parol. An article returned for author’s revision and not submitted to the editorial staff within one (1) month from the return date, is withdrawn from publication, of which the author is notified.
14. If author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editorial board may sent the article for additional review. The Editor-in-Chief resolves the conflict by his own authority at the meeting of the Editorial Council.
15. The Editorial Council considers the reviewers’ recommendations and makes decision on rejection of an article at its meeting. The article not recommended for publication by the Editorial Council may not be submitted for publication in the Journal once again. The notification on rejected article is sent to the author via e-mail.
Reasons for rejection:
the Journal subject scope mismatch, or incompliance with the requirements; negative reviews by majority of reviewers;
- the Editorial Council decision as entered into the minutes of the Editorial Council meeting;
- author’s violence of the copyright and intellectual protection laws of the Russian Federation (in case of the appropriate expert conclusion provided).
16. The Editorial Board notifies an author on his/her article acceptance and informs on the period of publication.
17. Positive reviews may not be sufficient for publication in the Journal. The Editorial Council makes the final decision on the article publication. In case of dispute, the Editor-in-Chief makes final decision by his own authority.
18. Original reviews of submitted papers remain deposited by the Journal for five (5) years.
19. On author’s demand, the Editorial Board send him/her the review copies or the reasonable rejection; The Editorial Board shall sent the review copies to the Minister of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation.
Editor-in Chief
Yakov L. Shrayberg, Dr. Sc. in Engineering, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Education, Director of Research of the Russian National Public Library for Science and Technology
Publication Frequency
12 times a year
Open Access Policy
“Scientific and Technical Libraries” is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediatly upon publication.
Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.
For more information please read BOAI statement.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
An unilateral anonymous ("blind") peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial stuff of «Scientific and Technical Libraries». This implies that neither the reviewer is aware of the authorship of the manuscript, nor the author maintains any contact with the reviewer.
1. The Journal Scientific and technical libraries” (“Journal”) send for review every submitted article within the Journal subject scope.
2. The Journal Editor-in-Chief makes the decision on which reviewers to send an article for review.
3. The Journal Editorial Board members are the main reviewers.
4. The Editorial Board resolve on the engagement of outsource reviewers which composition may be extended wherever necessary.
5. Double blind peer-review process is provided:
The papers are sent to reviewers without specifying author(s) name (s) or other identifying data; the review copy (if demanded by an author) shall not disclose reviewer’s name, organization, or signature.
6. Members of the Editorial Board, Editorial Council and outsource experts in corresponding areas of library and information sciences with an academic degree and publications on the subject within the recent 3-year period, may review the submitted articles. .
7. Every submitted article is sent to three reviewers for review. The Editor-in-Chief may take a decision to send a manuscript for additional review.
8. Timeframe for peer reviews falls within one to three weeks.
9. The Journal publish only original papers never published before. Upon the decision of the Editorial Board, an article of special relevance published in a foreign or international journal or in conference proceedings may be published in the Journal in the Russian language provided that author’s, rightholder’s, founder’s or publishers’ consent for publication is received.
10. Adherence to review ethics:
Reviewer shall report on the conflict of interests (if any) before reviewing: s/he shall not conclude on the quality of the submitted article based on his/her personal attitude toward an author, shall not disclose content to a third party and/or use it in personal interests. Reviewer should remain respectful and mindful in his/her language.
11. Upon the review completion, reviewer shall provide further sound recommendations:
- the article is recommended for publication
- the article is recommended for publication after the author addresses reviewer’s concerns and refines his/her article;
- the article may not be published in the Journal.
12. Recommendations on refining are to be sent to the author who is to address them when preparing a new version of the article, or to reject them (fully or in part) in a well-argued manner. The author shall submit the revised version within two weeks upon the notification of revision. The refined article is submitted for re-review.
13. In case of the discontent with reviewer’s comments, an author may withdraw his/her article by notifying the editorial staff in written and by parol. An article returned for author’s revision and not submitted to the editorial staff within one (1) month from the return date, is withdrawn from publication, of which the author is notified.
14. If author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editorial board may sent the article for additional review. The Editor-in-Chief resolves the conflict by his own authority at the meeting of the Editorial Council.
15. The Editorial Council considers the reviewers’ recommendations and makes decision on rejection of an article at its meeting. The article not recommended for publication by the Editorial Council may not be submitted for publication in the Journal once again. The notification on rejected article is sent to the author via e-mail.
Reasons for rejection:
the Journal subject scope mismatch, or incompliance with the requirements; negative reviews by majority of reviewers;
- the Editorial Council decision as entered into the minutes of the Editorial Council meeting;
- author’s violence of the copyright and intellectual protection laws of the Russian Federation (in case of the appropriate expert conclusion provided).
16. The Editorial Board notifies an author on his/her article acceptance and informs on the period of publication.
17. Positive reviews may not be sufficient for publication in the Journal. The Editorial Council makes the final decision on the article publication. In case of dispute, the Editor-in-Chief makes final decision by his own authority.
18. Original reviews of submitted papers remain deposited by the Journal for five (5) years.
19. On author’s demand, the Editorial Board send him/her the review copies or the reasonable rejection; The Editorial Board shall sent the review copies to the Minister of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation.
Editor-in Chief
Yakov L. Shrayberg, Dr. Sc. in Engineering, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Education, Director of Research of the Russian National Public Library for Science and Technology
Indexation
Articles in "Scientific and Technical Libraries" are indexed by several systems:
- Russian Scientific Citation Index (RSCI) – a database, accumulating information on papers by Russian scientists, published in native and foreign titles. The RSCI project is under development since 2005 by “Electronic Scientific Library” foundation (elibrary.ru).
- Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. The Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online journals of Europe and America's largest scholarly publishers, plus scholarly books and other non-peer reviewed journals.
Publishing Ethics
The Editorial Board of the Journal “Nauchniye i tekhnicheskiye biblioteki” (“Scientific and Technical Libraries”) observes the principles of publication ethics shared by the international community, and, in particular, those stated in the Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and by high-profile international journals and publishers’.
To avoid unfair practice of publication (plagiarism, delivery of unreliable data, etc.) and to ensure high quality of science publications, every Editorial Board member, author, reviewer, publisher, and Editorial Board and editorial staff member shall comply with ethical standards, regulations and rules, and undertake every reasonable measure to prevent their infringement. Adherence to science publication ethics means: to ensure copyright and intellectual property right, to improve journal quality and to avoid unlawful use of copyrighted materials for the benefit of unauthorized persons.
The publisher is responsible for publication of copyrighted materials and for the ethical performance of the Editorial Board, editorial staff, reviewers, and authors.
The Journal Editorial Board is guided by the principles of scientific rigor, objectivity, high expertise, and neutrality.
The Editorial Board shall make decision on publication upon consultation with reviewers. The decision shall be based on the paper scientific importance, its uniqueness (excluding reviews or translations), and orientation towards research findings implementation in library practice.
By submitting papers to the “Scientific and Technical Libraries” Journal, the authors (or the team of authors) acknowledge that they are responsible for the novelty and reliability of their study results. Cited excerpts or statements shall be supplemented with references to source and authorship. Excessive citations and any form of plagiarism, including improperly shaped quotes, rephrasing or usurpation of scientific property are seen as being inappropriate and unethical.
Those individuals who do not participate in writing and preparing the paper for publication shall not be cited as co-authors.
Authors shall present and formalize the manuscripts in accordance with the Journal rules. The authors should respect the work of the Editorial Board members and reviewers and remove shortcomings as long as those are specified in the reviews.
Manuscripts to be reviewed shall be treated as confidential documents. They shall not be submitted to inspection or discussion by the third party if unauthorized by the Editorial Board.
Reviewers are expected to review objectively and in a well-argued manner and to provide well-substantiated recommendations. Personal criticism is inappropriate.
Reviewers acknowledge that the manuscripts they review are regarded as the authors’ intellectual property and are not subject to disclosure. The disclosure is permitted only if the reviewer states the lack of credibility or fraud of scientific data presented in the article.
Founder
- Russian National Public Library for Science and Technology
Author fees
Publication in “Scientific and Technical Libraries" is free of charge for all the authors.
The journal doesn't have any Arcticle processing charges.
The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.
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
"Scientific and Technical Libraries" use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.
Preprint and postprint Policy
Prior to acceptance and publication in "Scientific and Technical Libraries", authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.
As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in "Scientific and Technical Libraries" we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.
Glossary (by SHERPA)
Artificial Intelligence (AI) policy of the “Scientific and technical libraries” journal
The Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board of the “Scientific and technical libraries” journal admit the existence of the multitude of AI-based tools and instruments. The AI policy of “SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL LIBRARIES” journal is to be committed to the responsible use of AI-technologies and keeping up high standards of scientific publishing and publications, in particular.
The authors utilizing the AI-based tools should use them responsibly, transparently and ethically and be committed to the principles of ethics promoted by COPE, WAME, ICMJE, UNESCO, RF national standards GOST R 71657-2024 and GOST R 70949-2023.
The authors are fully responsible for the article content, including texts and images, generated with AI, as well as for appropriate citation of related materials.
The authors must make certain that a chosen AI-technology does not pretend for the copyright (or any other right) to their content or does not restrict content use in any way that violates the author’s right or the rights of the “SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL LIBRARIES” journal, including the publishers’ right for publishing materials after they are accepted.
The authors should periodically revise the terms of AI-technology use and to be aware of the updates and their fully compliance.
The AI-technologies may be used by the authors to assist in paper preparation or writing however they must not eliminate completely human author’s contribution. The authors are fully responsible for the accuracy of the article content and must assure that all assumptions, citations, analysis procedures and data conform to their experience and their research components.
Before incorporating AI-generated fragments into the article to be published in the “SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL LIBRARIES” journal, the authors must ensure that the final version is unique and compliant with their experience and opinions and conforms to the ethical principles and editorial standards of the SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL LIBRARIES journal.
The authors must utilize AI-technologies in the manner that is compliant with confidentiality requirements and other regulations, they must not expose personal or other sensible information. This includes observance of personal information protection laws, refuse of AI to reproduce unique styles or voices of other humans, as well as verification of AI-generated content for accuracy, consistency and transparency.
The authors have to be aware of biases in AI-generated pieces and should take all necessary precautions against stereotypes and disinformation.
When loading protected, confidential or unpublished content, the authors should use AI with appropriate data security facilities.
Information
The authors must specify every use of AI to the editorial staff and must provide full and detailed information on all AI uses in the section “Methods” or other appropriate section of the manuscript.
The authors should keep documents on every AI-technology used, including information on the purpose of use, AI impact on key arguments or conclusions, and on the verification of AI-generated content.
Authorship
AI-based instruments can not bear responsibility for a published paper as they do not comply with the requirements applied to authors.
Images and graphics
Use of AI-technologies for generating graphic materials and images must be specified in figure captions for the journal readers to understand how the image or figure was created.
Rights protection
The authors must not apply AI-technologies in a way that restricts their own rights for the article materials, the rights of “SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL LIBRARIES” journal or the rights of third parties. This implies compliance with laws and regulations to exclude an AI-technology and / or provider of such technology from acquiring the rights for author’s original content, including the right to train AI-technology on this content.
The author can prevent unwitting data communication through thorough study of the terms and provisions of AI-technologies use, including information of intellectual property rights, reuse of data or withdrawal.
Editor-in-Chief
The Editor-in-Chief may conclude at his own discretion that use of AI in a publication is unreasonable. Sometimes, AI-based instruments are inappropriately used for generating substantial comments or vast literature reviews. This may result in refusal of the manuscript or the request for major revision to exclude or to reduce the AI-generated parts of the manuscript.
AI as a reviewer
The Editorial Board of the “SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL LIBRARIES” journal seeks expert opinion of reviewer and supposes this is his or her personal opinion provided.
Besides, AI-based instruments, or other third-party services, may store or use any information as a clue for text generation, which could lead to breach of review process confidentiality.
Reviewers must handle the manuscript and other data received from the journal, as well as the review report and related correspondence, as s/he would handle any confidential information.
Communication of any part of manuscript or review to a generative AI services (or any other third-party’s AI-based instrument) shall be interpreted as the violation of confidentiality, and correspondingly deemed the violation of this Policy standards.
