Editorial Policy

Editorial policy of the journal

"Theological Collection of the Tambov

Theological Seminary"

The regulation was supplemented and adopted at a meeting of the editorial board of the Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary on February 19, 2026.

The Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary is a periodical scientific peer-reviewed publication designed to discuss theoretical and practical issues in theology. Its key feature is its wide range of topics, which combines theological research with the achievements of related scientific disciplines, allowing for an interdisciplinary approach to current theological issues.

Frequency: 4 times a year.

The journal's editorial policy is based on the following principles:

  • relevant issues of the published materials;
  • careful selection of materials for publication and a high level of peer review;
  • high-quality multidimensional editing of articles (content, design, and proofreading);
  • compliance with GOST requirements and international publishing standards;
  • adherence to editorial ethics in relation to article authors and reviewers;
  • accessibility of published materials for search and reading (placement of full-text versions of articles on a special page of the seminar website and the website of the scientific journal);
  • Authors (including doctoral students, postgraduate students, and candidates for academic degrees) are not charged for publishing and reviewing articles.

Rules for selecting articles

Articles for publication in the scientific journal "Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary" are selected based on a comprehensive set of criteria that cover the following key aspects:

Compliance with the journal's subject matter. The material must fit into the scientific focus of the publication and comply with its editorial policy.

Quality of content. The scientific novelty, relevance of the research, validity of the methodology, reliability of the results, and reasonableness of the conclusions are evaluated.

Level of presentation. Compliance with the article structure (introduction, main part, conclusion, list of references), correct citation, and formatting of bibliographic references, tables, figures, and formulas in accordance with editorial requirements are taken into account.

Ethical standards. Plagiarism is checked, as well as the correctness of citing co-authors and funding sources, disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, and adherence to publication ethics principles.

Rules and regulations for compliance with publication ethics for authors, editors, and reviewers of the journal "Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary"

Rules for compliance with publication ethics for authors

Reliability and scientific novelty. Authors are required to present only reliable results of their research that are scientifically novel. The publication of deliberately erroneous or falsified data is strictly prohibited.

Originality and citation. Authors guarantee the complete originality of the presented results. All borrowed fragments, ideas, or statements must be accompanied by correct references to the author and the original source. The following are considered unethical and unacceptable:

  • Plagiarism in any form;
  • Uncited quotations;
  • Paraphrasing without citing the source;
  • Appropriation of the results of other people's research;
  • Excessive borrowing.

Recognition of scientific contribution. It is necessary to properly recognize the contribution of all persons and works that have influenced the study. The article should include references to publications that played a significant role in the course of scientific work.

Determination of authorship. Only individuals who have made a significant contribution to the planning, execution, or analysis of the study should be listed as co-authors. It is not acceptable to include co-authors who did not actually participate in the work.

Consent to publication. Submission of a manuscript implies the prior consent of all co-authors to its publication in this journal. Exclusivity of submission. Authors are not allowed to submit a manuscript to the journal that:

  • has already been published in another publication;
  • is under consideration in another journal.

Correction of errors. In the event of significant errors or inaccuracies in the article, both during the review process and after publication, the author must immediately notify the journal's editorial office.

Rules for Publication Ethics for Editors of the Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary

Principles of professional activity

The editor is obliged to be guided by the principles of scientificity, objectivity, professionalism and impartiality in his work. All decisions regarding acceptance, revision or rejection of manuscripts should be based solely on their scientific value and compliance with editorial requirements.

Confidentiality of information

Unpublished data, ideas or information obtained during the review of manuscripts are confidential. The editor is not entitled to:

  • use them for personal, commercial or scientific purposes without the explicit written consent of the author;
  • to transfer them to third parties (including colleagues, reviewers without official appointment, representatives of other organizations) without the author's consent;
  • to disclose information about the submission of a manuscript before a decision on publication is made.

Prohibition of manipulation of citations

Under no circumstances should the editor:

  • require the author to include references to publications in this journal as a condition for accepting the manuscript for review or publication;
  • exert pressure on the author in order to increase the number of self-citations of the journal;
  • offer the author to add references in exchange for positive decisions on the manuscript.

Countering Unethical Practices

The editor's responsibilities include:

  • Preventing situations where authors, reviewers, or other individuals involved in the publication process exhibit signs of unethical behavior (plagiarism, duplication of publications, falsification or fabrication of data, incorrect authorship, conflicts of interest, etc.);
  • initiating a review of materials if there is a reasonable suspicion of an ethical violation;
  • ensuring that publications containing plagiarism, falsification, or data fabrication are removed from scientific circulation in accordance with the retractio (article withdrawal) procedures adopted by the scientific community (including COPE recommendations). Review of Claims and Appeals The editor and the publisher are responsible for:
  • responding promptly to all reasonable claims related to reviewed manuscripts or published materials;
  • to ensure a transparent and fair procedure for handling appeals and complaints;
  • to provide authors and interested parties with reasoned responses within a reasonable timeframe;
  • to initiate additional review or investigation if necessary.

Disclosure of Conflict of Interest

The editor is required to declare any potential conflicts of interest (financial, personal, institutional) that may affect the objectivity of the decisions made. In the event of such a conflict, the editor must transfer the manuscript to another member of the editorial board.

Publication Ethics Guidelines for Reviewers

Confidentiality. A manuscript submitted for review is a confidential document. The reviewer is not allowed to share it with third parties or discuss it with them without the permission of the editorial board, nor is it allowed to disclose information about the content of the manuscript before it is published.

Objectivity and reasonableness of the assessment. The reviewer is obliged to provide an objective, impartial, and reasoned assessment of the scientific work. The review should focus on analyzing the methodology, the reliability of the results, the validity of the conclusions, and the scientific significance of the study. The criticism should address the content of the work rather than the author's personality. Criticism should focus on the content of the work, not the author's personality. Personal criticism of the author is strictly prohibited.

Use of information. The reviewer is not allowed to use the unpublished data, ideas, or concepts contained in the reviewed manuscript in their own research or for any personal purposes without the author's written consent. If the reviewer discovers potentially significant ideas, they may mention them in the review as a possible direction for further research, but not for their own use.

Conflict of interest. The reviewer is required to notify the editorial office of any potential conflict of interest that may affect the objectivity of the review. Such situations include:

  • personal, professional, or financial ties with the author(s);
  • collaboration with the organization listed in the author's affiliation;
  • competition in similar scientific research;
  • other circumstances that may cause bias.

Competence. If the reviewer believes that they do not have sufficient qualifications to evaluate the manuscript in all or individual aspects, they must immediately inform the editor and refuse to review it.

Terms and responsibilities. The reviewer is obligated to complete the review within the deadlines set by the editorial office. If there are circumstances that prevent the review from being completed on time, the reviewer must notify the editorial office to agree on a new schedule or find an alternative reviewer.

Rules for collaboration between the editorial office, the publisher, and the authors in cases where errors are discovered before and after publication

General principles of action in the event of errors in the publication

 When errors are identified in the published materials, the editorial board is guided by the following principles:

 Respect and professionalism. Criticism focuses exclusively on the content of the text and the identified inaccuracies, without referring to the author's personality. Interaction with the author is based on mutual respect and a constructive dialogue.

Prompt response. The editorial board strives to identify and eliminate errors as soon as possible after their discovery. Timely correction minimizes the potential damage to the author's scientific reputation, the journal, and the credibility of academic knowledge in general.

Evidence and validity. Each indication of an error must be accompanied by a clear justification: a reference to an authoritative source, a scientific reference book, the results of fact-checking, or an expert opinion. Without confirmation, comments cannot serve as a basis for making changes.

Transparency of the process. The editorial office provides full information to the author about the identified errors and planned corrections, explaining in detail the reasons and grounds for adjustments. In the case of changes after publication, the editorial office informs the readers (for example, through a note in the electronic version of the article or an official notification on the journal's website), indicating the nature of the corrections and the date of their implementation.

Detection of errors BEFORE publication (at the stage of editing)

  1. Author's responsibility

The author is fully responsible for the accuracy of the factual materials and data presented in the article. In the event of errors in the manuscript after its submission to the editorial office, the author is obliged to immediately notify the editorial office.

  1. Actions of the editorial office in the event of errors during the editing process

In the event of errors or inaccuracies during the editorial preparation, the editorial office acts as follows:

Clear indication of edits. All changes made are recorded in the document editing mode.

Commenting on significant changes. Each significant edit is accompanied by an explanation or justification from the editor.

Categorization of edits:

Technical and obvious edits (typos, spelling, grammatical, and punctuation errors) are made by the editor without prior approval from the author. However, the author is provided with a final list of such corrections.

Stylistic edits (rephrasing to improve the clarity and style of the text) are proposed to the author for approval. The author has the right to accept or reject these edits by providing well-reasoned objections.

Factual and semantic corrections (doubts about the correctness of facts, figures, logic of reasoning or conclusions) must be agreed upon with the author. In this case, the editor:

  • formulates a specific question or remark;
  • may request additional explanations or the source of information;
  • does not make changes without the author's confirmation or consent.

Compliance with deadlines. The editorial office provides the author with a reasonable timeframe to review the edits and make necessary changes to the text.

Recording the dialogue. All correspondence related to edits and text approval is conducted through the editorial office's official email and is archived.

  1. Author's responsibilities during the editing process

 During the editorial revision of the text, the author is required to:

  • make agreed-upon revisions within the deadlines set by the editorial office;
  • provide a well-reasoned justification for your position in case of disagreement with the proposed revisions, providing additional evidence or explanations;
  • be ready to provide sources of information to confirm disputed facts, data, or statements;
  • promptly inform the editorial office about any errors or inaccuracies found in the manuscript.

Error detection AFTER publication: Retraction procedure

In case of significant errors in an already published article, a retraction (publication withdrawal) procedure is carried out.

General Provisions

The document is developed on the basis of the Rules for the withdrawal (retraction) of an article from publication by the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (ANRI). It regulates the procedure for eliminating violations in the published scientific materials of a network publication.

Retraction is an official procedure for the withdrawal of a publication by the editorial board of the publication. It is applied if after publication the following are identified:

  • serious violations of scientific or publication ethics;
  • errors that make the research results unreliable;
  • other circumstances that call into question the scientific value of the work. Grounds for Retraction
  • Plagiarism is the verbatim copying of someone else's text without citing the source, as well as the borrowing of ideas, tables, images, concepts, or the structure of a research.
  • Self-plagiarism is the republication of the same work or a significant portion of it under a different title in another publication, claiming it as new.

Duplication of an article in multiple publications.

Falsification or fabrication of data (for example, tampering with experimental results).

Serious errors in the publication (for example, incorrect interpretation of research results) that cast doubt on its scientific value.

Incorrect author list — inclusion of individuals who do not meet the criteria for authorship.

Undeclared hidden conflict of interest.

Republication of an article without the author's consent.

The procedure for initiating and making a decision

Retraction can be initiated by:

  • the editorial board of a scientific journal, based on internal review and complaints from readers or reviewers;
  • by the author of the article, if they find significant errors or violations after publication.

The procedure is as follows:

If the initiative comes from the authors, they send a motivated letter to the editorial office with a detailed explanation of the reasons for the retraction.

If the initiative comes from a third party, the editorial office:

  • conducts an expert review (attracts specialized experts);
  • based on the results of the review, makes a decision on retraction;
  • notifies the author team about the decision.

The decision to withdraw the article is made by the editorial board of the Journal and is documented in a meeting protocol.

Consequences of Retraction

After the decision on retraction is made:

  • The article is excluded from the list of valid scientific sources - it is not recommended to refer to it in subsequent works.
  • In the databases of scientific publications (for example, in the RSCI), a special note appears that the article is withdrawn, and a accompanying notification is published with the reasons.

A retracted article remains on the scientific journal's website as part of the corresponding issue, but:

  • the electronic version of the text is marked with the inscription "RETRACTED / RETRACTED" and the date of the retraction is indicated;
  • a similar mark is placed next to the article in the table of contents of the issue;
  • the article's commentary includes the reason for the retraction (in the case of plagiarism, it includes the sources of the borrowed material).

The article is not mechanically removed from the issue or the archive; instead, the texts of the retracted articles remain in their original positions with the appropriate marking.

An exception to the above rule: an article may be removed from a scientific journal's website only in extreme cases, if its content could harm a certain part of the community or science.

Informing external organizations

Information about retracted articles is submitted to:

  • the Ethics Council for Scientific Publications of the ANRI, for inclusion in the unified database of retracted articles;
  • the National Electronic Library (elibrary.ru): information about the article and the full text remain on the platform, but are supplemented with information about the retraction;
  • the Metaphor Information System;
  • the National Platform of the Russian Science Citation Index. Note.

NOTE. Retracted articles and links from them are excluded from the Russian Science Citation Index and other databases, and are not taken into account when calculating scientometric indicators.

 

Rules for distributing a work BEFORE and AFTER its publication in an edition (preprints, archiving, etc.)

  1. Requirements for submitted manuscripts

 When submitting a manuscript to the editorial office, the author must confirm that:

  • the article has not been previously published in any scientific journal;
  • the article has not been accepted for publication in another journal (is not under consideration in other journals).
  1. Rules for citing journal publications

 When citing articles published in the scientific journal "Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary", it is mandatory to provide a link to the official website of the journal with the full URL of the material.

  1. Publication of preprints

The Editorial Board accepts for consideration preprints — manuscripts posted:

  • on the author's personal pages;
  • on specialized scientific platforms.

Recommendations for authors:

  • When submitting a manuscript, indicate that the work is a preprint;
  • Attach a list of resources where the manuscript is located (for proper verification by the Anti-Plagiarism system);
  • Keep in mind that a preprint is not considered a duplicate publication.

The final decision on the publication of a preprint is made by the editorial board.

  1. Archiving manuscripts after review

The journal's editorial board allows authors to independently archive manuscripts that:

  • Have passed the review stage;
  • accepted for publication;
  • have undergone editorial and publishing processing (proofread and formatted).

Allowed platforms for posting:

  • the author's personal website or blog;
  • an institutional repository;
  • a subject repository;
  • direct exchange with teachers or students - exclusively for personal use (without public distribution).

Mandatory requirements for authors:

After the publication of the final version of the article, the author must add a link to the published article to all previously posted entries (with the DOI, URL, or bibliographic reference).

The posted version of the manuscript should not:

  • make any changes based on the reviewer's or editor's comments;
  • replace or delete the text of the already posted version of the manuscript.
  1. Distribution of postprints

Postprints of articles from the Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary in PDF and JATS XML format are available in the open access on the journal's website, the National Platform, Elibrary.ru, and the Metaphor Information System after the completion of the editorial and publishing cycle (reviewing, editing, layout, verification, and signing for publication) on the day of the journal's release according to the schedule.

Glossary (according to the international database SHERPA RoMEO)

Preprint (Preprint) - a draft of a manuscript or scientific article (including abstracts of reports, dissertations, etc.), provided for expert review by the editorial board of the journal. Placed before publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal in order to discuss and clarify the results of the work.

Postprint (Postprint) - a scientific article that has been reviewed and officially published. Includes the author's manuscript and the publisher's editorial work (formatting and preparation for printing).

  1. Archiving The archive of the journal "Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary" is available after publication in:

In the NEB, you can perform an advanced search for journal articles (by keywords, author, title). The link to the full text of the article is indicated on the article page in the Scientific Electronic Library. eLIBRARY.ru (For example, the full text (PDF, Russian)).

  • the Cyberlenink scientific electronic library, built on the open science paradigm (OpenScience), is free for all readers, in a full–text version;
  • full texts of articles are stored on this website in the "Archives" section; they can be accessed through the page https://ojs.tamds.ru/1/issue/archive;
  • on the national platform of periodical scientific publications (RCSI) https://journals.rcsi.science/2687-072X/issue/archive;
  • printed copies of the journal's issues are permanently stored in the Russian State Library (RSL) and other leading libraries of the Russian Federation.

The procedure for reviewing and publishing materials

Type of review

All manuscripts submitted to the editorial office of the journal "Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary" undergo mandatory double blind review. This means that neither the author nor the reviewer know each other's names or places of work, and all correspondence is conducted through the editorial staff of the journal "Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary".

Review period

The review process in the journal "Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary" takes an average of 2 to 4 months (up to 120 days).

  1. General provisions.

Articles submitted to the editorial board of the peer-reviewed scientific journal "Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary" (hereinafter referred to as the Journal) must comply with its profile and contain theoretically and (or) practically significant scientific conclusions (results), as well as meet the requirements for publications: http://www.tamds.ru/trebovaniya-k-publikatsiyamv-bogoslovskom-sbornike-tambovskoj-duhovnoj-seminarii/; https://ojs.tamds.ru/1/36

The percentage of originality of the manuscript submitted for review must be at least 75%. Plagiarism checking is carried out using the licensed version of the Antiplagiat. VUZ program, with a mandatory report.

Authors from among students, master's students and post-graduate students provide the editorial office with a completed and certified review of the supervisor or other specialist with a degree in this scientific field, containing a recommendation for publication in the Journal.

As reviewers, members of the editorial board and the editorial council of the Journal, as well as the experts they involve – scientists and specialists in the field (having a degree of Doctor or Candidate of Sciences) can act. All reviewers are recognized experts in the subject matter of the reviewed materials and have published articles on the subject matter of the reviewed article within the last three years.

A person who reviews an article cannot be the author (co-author) of the article.

  • 2. Organization and course of reviewing

The manuscript submitted by the author is sent to the profile of scientific research or on the subject of the issues considered in the manuscript for review to the members of the editorial board and (or) the editorial council of the Journal, as well as to the experts they involve, in order to evaluate according to the criteria set out in section 3 of this document.

Reviewers are notified that the manuscripts sent to them are the private property of the authors and belong to the information that is not subject to disclosure. After the review is completed, the author of the manuscript is provided with a copy of the review or a reasoned refusal, without a signature or indication of the reviewer's name, position, or place of work.

A copy of the review can be provided upon request to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. Confidentiality may be violated only if the reviewer claims that the materials in the manuscript are unreliable or falsified.

Articles that have successfully passed the review process are placed in the queue for publication in the upcoming issues of the Journal.

If the manuscript review indicates that the article needs to be revised, it is sent back to the author for further processing. The author must make all necessary corrections and resubmit the revised text, along with an identical electronic version (marked as "Revised"), along with the original version and a response letter to the reviewer explaining the changes made. After the revisions, the article is reviewed again, and the editorial board decides whether it can be published.

In case of disagreement with the reviewer's opinion, the author of the manuscript has the right to provide a reasoned response to the Journal editorial office. The manuscript may be sent for re-reviewing or for approval to the editorial board.

The decision on the expediency of publication after the second review is made by the editor-in-chief (deputy editor-in-chief), and, if necessary, by the editorial board as a whole. The editorial office does not make any commitments regarding the publication dates of articles.

The editorial office does not disclose information related to the manuscript (including information about its receipt, content, review process, reviewers' comments, and the final decision) to anyone other than the authors and reviewers themselves.

Reviewers and editorial staff are not allowed to use the materials of an article under review (in whole or in part) for their own benefit, as well as knowledge about its content before publication.

Reviews of manuscripts must be kept by the Journal's editorial office for five years from the date of publication of the articles.

The Journal's editorial office does not engage in discussions with authors regarding rejected articles.

  1. Requirements for the content of the review

The review should contain a qualified analysis of the manuscript material, an objective, reasoned assessment of it, and reasonable recommendations to the author and the editorial board regarding the publication of this material.

In the review, special attention should be paid to highlighting the following issues:

The manuscript corresponds to the subject of one of the sections of the Journal ("Theology and religious Philosophy", "Historical Theology and National History", "Church and Practical Sciences", "Spiritual Literature").

A general analysis of the relevance of the topic, scientific level, terminology, and structure of the manuscript.

The scientific presentation, compliance of the methods, techniques, recommendations and research results used by the author with modern achievements of science and practice.

Assessment of the manuscript preparedness for publication in terms of language and style, compliance with the established requirements for the design of manuscript materials.

Compliance with the requirements for the volume of the manuscript as a whole and the proportionality of its individual elements (text, tables, and illustrative material), the presence and correctness of bibliographic references, the appropriateness of including tables and illustrative material in the article, and their relevance to the topic being discussed, as well as recommendations for reducing or increasing the volume of the manuscript (specify which element of the manuscript should be reduced or increased).

Evaluation of the originality and place of the reviewed work among other works on a similar topic, including aspects of the research's novelty and the appropriateness of using sources and scientific literature on the subject.

The author's inaccuracies and errors in the factual material and the logic of the text construction.

The author's ethical correctness and ability to argue their own point of view on a scientific problem.

The review can be presented in the form of an expert questionnaire with relevant explanations and comments (see Application), or in a free form, taking into account the criteria outlined in Section 3.2 of this document.

The reviewer's comments and suggestions should be objective and principled, aimed at improving the scientific and methodological levels of the article.

The final part of the review should include well-founded conclusions about the manuscript as a whole and a clear recommendation on whether it should be published in the Journal, with the section specified.

In the case of a negative assessment of the manuscript as a whole, the reviewer must substantiate their conclusions for each criterion.

APPLICATION

Sample of the expert evaluation of the article in the form of a questionnaire

REVIEW

of the article "The title of the article..." received by the editorial office of the scientific journal "Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary"

 No.

 Name of the criterion

 Article evaluation

 Maximum Score

 1.

 Correspondence of the article to the subject of the journal

 

 

 2.

 Compliance of the article with the required volume of publication (15 – 40 thousand characters).

 

 

 3.

 The relevance of the topic chosen by the author, the formulation of the problem under study.

 

 

 4.

 Structuring of the article (the presence of an introduction, conclusion, adequate content of the internal division of the main part).

 

 

 5.

 The scientific presentation of the presented material and the relevance of the use of terminology, sources and literature on the topic of the study.

 

 

 6.

 The level of scientific understanding, compliance of the used methods, techniques, as well as the author's recommendations and research results with modern achievements of science and practice.

 

 

 7.

 Speech and stylistic design of the article, compliance with language norms.

 

 

 8.

 Compliance with the requirements of the article design (availability of UDC, information about the author, annotation, keywords in Russian and English, properly designed in-text links to sources and literature, a properly designed list of references and its transliterated version).

 

 

 9.

 Factual accuracy of the presented material and cited sources.

 

 

 10.

 Ethical correctness in the presentation of the author's position.

 

 

 TOTAL:

 

 

For each criterion, the review author gives from 0 to 4 points in accordance with the following scale:

0 – complete non-compliance with the criterion;

1 – weak compliance with the criterion;

2 – the criterion is formally met;

3 – the criterion is sufficiently met;

4 – full compliance with the criterion.

 

According to the first two criteria, only two evaluation options are possible:

0 – complete non-compliance with the criterion;

4 – full compliance with the criterion.

The maximum number of points according to the proposed criteria is 40. Articles that have scored at least 30 points in total according to all criteria are allowed for publication. At the same time, less than 2 points are not allowed for any criterion.

If the expert gives less than 2 points on one or more criteria, the article is sent for revision. According to all criteria that require improvement, the reviewer gives exhaustive written explanations.

Articles that have scored less than 24 points according to the results of the expert evaluation, as well as those that have received 0 points according to one or more criteria, are rejected. In case of rejection of the manuscript, the reviewer motivates his decision on each criterion.

The review should end with the phrase:

"The article meets the requirements and can be published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal "Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary".

Or:

"The article needs to be finalized according to the above criteria. After making amendments, it is recommended for reconsideration by the editorial board of the peer-reviewed scientific journal "Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary".

Or:

"The article is not recommended for publication in the peer-reviewed scientific journal "Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary" due to non-compliance with the requirements."

The procedure for publishing scientific articles

  1. Submission of materials

Authors submit materials in one of the following ways: through the electronic editorial system (the article in electronic form and the author's statement); to the email address of the person responsible for the issue: tdsnauka@yandex.ru.

  1. Preliminary review (within 3 business days)

The person responsible for the issue checks the submitted materials according to the following criteria:

  • compliance of the article's subject matter with the profile and areas of the publication;
  • compliance of the author with the established requirements for the text format;
  • the level of borrowing using the Antiplagiat system (the share of quoted text and borrowing should not exceed 25%).

The following decisions may be made based on the results of the review:

  • a request for adjustments to be made if any fixable errors are detected;
  • rejection of the materials if there is a significant discrepancy with the criteria (for example, if the acceptable level of borrowing is exceeded or if the materials do not match the publication's theme).
  1. Scientific review (up to 120 calendar days)

Materials that have passed the preliminary review are sent for scientific review.

  1. Publication decision

The editorial board makes a decision based on the reviewer's findings.

Possible outcomes:

  • Accept for publication — the article meets all requirements and is ready for publication;
  • Return for revision — the author receives detailed recommendations from the reviewer to address the comments;
  • Reject — if there are irreparable flaws or if the article does not meet the publication's scientific standards;
  • the final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication (or its rejection) is made by the editor-in-chief.
  1. Review periods

The total review period for the material should not exceed 120 days from the date of its receipt by the editorial office (including preliminary review and peer review). Accelerated or urgent review and publication of materials is not provided. Review is carried out in the order of receipt of articles.

  1. Publication planning

The selection of materials for inclusion in the current issue is carried out in accordance with the editorial plans of the publication.

The editorial decision is mandatory for the author to be informed about.

The person responsible for the issue of the scientific journal:

  • informs the authors of the articles approved for publication about the planned dates of the publication of the material;
  • coordinates possible adjustments with the author, if they are required at the issue preparation stage;
  • notifies about the release date of the issue in which the article will be published.
  1. Paid services for authors or lack thereof

The scientific journal Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary belongs to open Access publications.

For authors:

  • publication is free;
  • no fees are paid;
  • there is no accelerated publication;
  • there is no fee for reviewing, editing, or layout;
  • the journal does not work with intermediaries; we only accept articles from authors.

For readers:

  • all articles in the electronic version are free and available immediately after the issue is released, without registration.

Funding: The publication is supported by the founder and publisher, the Religious Organization Tambov Theological Seminary of the Tambov Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Policy of processing personal data (authors, reviewers, readers) and compliance with confidentiality

The editorial board and reviewers of the journal are committed to maintaining confidentiality at all stages of reviewing manuscripts. This applies to:

  • the text of the manuscript;
  • accompanying materials;
  • information obtained during the review process.

Compliance with confidentiality is ensured in accordance with:

  • the rules for accepting and reviewing articles;
  • the ethical principles published on the journal's website.

Use of personal data (authors, reviewers, readers)

Authors: name, academic degree and position, organization/affiliation, ORCID/ResearcherID, contact details (e-mail, phone), postal address (for copy/contract), information on funding and conflicts of interest, manuscript metadata

Reviewers: name, academic degree/position, affiliation, contact details, expert areas, history of reviewing and recommendations.

Readers/users of the site: subscriptions/notifications, history of interaction with materials.

The Journal does not request or process special categories (biometric, "sensitive" data). If such data is unintentionally received, it will be immediately deleted or blocked.

Personal data (names, email addresses, and other information) provided by authors, reviewers, and readers when registering on the journal's website is used exclusively for the following purposes:

  • ensuring communication between the editorial office and the author/reviewer;
  • informing about the status of the manuscript review;
  • preparing the article for publication.

When registering as an author, the user is required to provide only the personal data that they are willing to share for public access in the "Author Information" section.

Publishing information about authors

In the case of accepting the manuscript for publication in the open access, the following data are published:

  • the author's place of work with the full address (index, country, city, street, building number);
  • email address;
  • identifiers in scientometric databases (ORCID, Researcher ID, etc.).

The specified information is placed:

  • in the printed version of the journal;
  • on the article page on the journal website, Elibrary.ru, RCNI "National Platform", IS "Metaphor", Crossref.

Limited access to contact information

The phone number of the author responsible for correspondence is provided only to:

  • the editor-in-chief;
  • the editor-in-chief. This number is used exclusively in emergency cases and is not subject to disclosure.

Legal basis for data processing

Personal data processing is carried out on the basis of the author's written consent, which is provided in the form of an original signed by hand when submitting the manuscript to the editorial office.

Data retention periods

The editorial office of the scientific journal establishes the following retention periods for various categories of data:

Manuscripts, reviews, and correspondence related to articles accepted for publication must be stored for at least 10 years from the date of publication. The metadata of published materials is stored indefinitely to ensure scientific integrity and archival records.

Materials related to manuscripts rejected by the editorial board are stored for 5 years from the date of the decision. This period is established to allow for the resolution of potential disputes and disagreements.

Reviewers' accounts are stored for 3 years from the date of the last user activity. After the specified period, personal data is subject to anonymization, while key metrics (review statistics, etc.) can be stored in an aggregated form.

Event logs (system logs) are stored for 12-24 months, unless otherwise required for information security or technical reasons.

Data for newsletters (alerts about the release of the next issue, etc.) is stored until the subject revokes their consent or unsubscribes from newsletters. In this case, the email address of a person who unsubscribes on their own initiative may be included in the "stop list" to prevent repeated newsletters at their request.

The established storage periods may be changed if required by current legislation.

Policy Update

The Policy is reviewed when processing processes, technologies, or legislation change. The current edition is published on the website of the scientific journal "Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary" in the "Editorial Policy" section.

Open access policy for publication metadata

The Open Access policy of the journal provides unlimited, instant and free access to metadata and to the full texts of peer—reviewed scientific articles via the Internet for all categories of users without any restrictions. Access is provided in accordance with the principles of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) and implies the possibility of using published materials for non-commercial purposes, with mandatory attribution and a link to the original source.

Some aspects of the Open Access

Policy Free access for readers

All journal materials are provided in the public domain without any subscriptions, registrations or other restrictions. Readers have free and unlimited access to metadata and full texts of articles from the moment of their publication.

Copyrights

Authors retain the exclusive copyrights to the published works. When submitting an article, the author enters into a license agreement with the editorial office, under which the author grants the journal a non-exclusive right to publish the article and related metadata in print and electronic form, as well as to distribute them in scientific databases.

Financing of publications

The costs associated with editorial processing, publication, and ensuring open access to the materials are covered by the publisher (Religious Organization - Spiritual Educational Institution of Higher Education "Tambov Theological Seminary of the Tambov Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church").

Licensing

The journal uses open licenses, most often the Creative Commons (CC) family of licenses.

The most common is the CC BY (Creative Commons Attribution) license, which allows:

  • to freely copy, distribute and reproduce the material;
  • to adapt and create derivative works;
  • to use the material for commercial purposes – provided that the original publication’s authorship is indicated.

The purpose of implementing the Open Access policy by the scientific journal "Theological Collection of the Tambov Theological Seminary" is to create conditions for accelerating scientific progress by providing free access to research results, as well as to increase the level of citation of publications in the academic environment.

Conditions for acquiring access to published works

Publications are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY 4.0): free distribution and use of materials is allowed, with mandatory attribution to the authors and a link to the original publication in the journal.