Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
The Editorial policy of the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” complies with the principles of transparency and the best international and national practices of scientific publications (DOI: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.12https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.12). As well as the ethics of the publishing house of Moscow State University of Psychology and Education.
The website of the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” is a section of the repository of psychological publications PsyJournals.ru (registered by the Federal Service on Supervision in Communications, Information Technology and Mass Media, Mass Media Registration Certificate El No. FS77-66447 dated 14.07.2016).
The journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” publishes original articles provided by Russian and international researchers and practitioners in the field of fundamental and practical psychology, outcomes of experimental studies, analytical reviews, essays, as well as relevant news of scientific life in Russia and worldwide.
ISSN (printed version): 1816-5435
ISSN (online): 2224-8935
Name of the Journal
The name of the Journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” is unique.
Mass Media Registration Certificate: PI No. FS77-51249, registry date 20.09.2012, Federal Service on Supervision in Communications, Information Technology and Mass Media.
The journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” is indexed in abstract and full-text databases, scientometric and search systems:
- Web of Science Emerging Sources Citation Index
- PsycInfo Journal Coverage List
- Directory of Open Access Journals
- Russian Science Citation Index
- Google Scholar
- EBSCO Academic Search
- Ulrich's Periodical Directory
- European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH PLUS)
- Index Copernicus
- VINITI Database RAS (VINITI)
- East View
Peer Review Evaluation
Manuscript review process determines the procedure for peer review of scientific manuscripts submitted by Authors for publication in the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology”.
The Editor of the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” publishes the works selected from the submitted manuscripts. The selection of manuscripts is based on the results of an independent double-blind peer review. The Editorial Board organizes a review procedure for all works submitted to the journal that correspond to its subject matter and rules for Authors. Peer review helps to improve the quality of the published materials as it determines the significance and originality of the submitted papers.
The journal implements a "double-blind" (anonymous) peer review process: the Authors are not provided the names of the Reviewers, and vice versa. The interaction of Authors and Reviewers is carried out only through the Editorial staff of the journal. Manuscripts rejected as a result of peer review are not re-reviewed. Other articles by Authors of such manuscripts are accepted for consideration in the usual way.
The Editorial Board assigns not less than two Reviewers for each manuscript.
The Reviewer selection process for the examination of the article is provided by the Editor-in-chief, deputies of the Editor-in-chief, and members of the Editorial Board.
The paper is then sent to independent Reviewers – subject specialists from Russia or abroad who research or practice in the same (or similar) field as the Author. Please note that neither co-Authors, nor co-workers can be reviewers.
Reviewers are notified that the manuscripts sent to them for review are the intellectual property of the Authors and are classified as non-disclosure information.
The outcomes of the review process are discussed by the members of the Editorial Board before the final decision is made. Based on their recommendations as well as on the judgments made by the Reviewers, the Editor may then accept or reject the paper, advise its revision, or suggest it be redirected to another journal.
The Editors inform the Author about the results of the review.
The review procedure period is from 4 weeks to 3 months from the date of registration of the manuscript (the date of assignment of a unique number of the received manuscript).
The Editor does not provide information regarding the manuscript (including information about its receipt, content, review process, critical comments of Reviewers, and the final decision) to anyone except members of the Editorial Board of the journal, the Author himself, and Reviewers.
Reviews are submitted upon request to any of the members of the Editorial Board of the journal, as well as to the Authors and specialized organizations.
The manuscript received from the Author is assigned a unique registration number, the Author is provided with anonymity during reviewing.
All incoming manuscripts are checked in the “Antiplagiat” plagiarism detection system.
In the case when a manuscript corresponds to the requirement of the journal and a positive result in the ꞌꞌAntiplagiatꞌꞌ plagiarism detection system is achieved, the manuscript is sent for examination to a specialist in a special subject area, as well as specialists in selective types of review.
The grounds for rejecting a manuscript prior to the peer review procedure are the following: violation of scientific citation standards, plagiarism, non-compliance with the requirements of the journal for articles, as well as the submission of a manuscript published earlier in another publication.
Interaction with the Author is arranged through the Online Publishing System.
For review, leading experts with the closest scientific specialization to the topic of the article, as well as specialists in the field of statistical data processing and scientometrics are involved.
The Editors have the right to invite Reviewers from among domestic and foreign experts, whose academic degree corresponds to a doctor or candidate of sciences, who have a recognized Authority in the field of knowledge to which the content of the manuscript belongs.
Reviewers cannot be the Author or co-Author of the work being reviewed, as well as supervisors of the applicant for a scientific degree and employees of the department in which the Author works.
Peer Review Procedure
A manuscript submitted to the Editorial office is registered with a unique registration number assigned to it. Manuscripts are allowed for review if they are prepared in accordance with the requirements of the journal, as well as those that have been checked in the “Antiplagiat” plagiarism detection system.
The Editors implement the principle of "double-blind" peer review and appoint at least two reviewers for each manuscript.
The Editors agree with the reviewer the deadline for submitting a review to the Publisher, taking into account the established deadlines for reviewing the manuscript. Reviewers are notified that the manuscripts sent to them for review are the intellectual property of the Authors and are classified as non-disclosure information. Interaction with reviewers is conducted by means of the Online Publishing System.
Reviews are discussed by the Editorial Board and serve as the basis for accepting or rejecting the manuscript.
The article is transferred to the reviewer without specifying any information about the Authors. The review should objectively evaluate the scientific article and contain a comprehensive analysis of its advantages and disadvantages. The review is compiled according to the standard form proposed by the Editors (placed in the Online Publishing System of the journal).
The content of the review should reflect the following main principles.
The relevance of the article. This section includes a brief argumentation of the reasons that caused the necessity to formulate and solve the problem.
Scientific novelty of the direction of research considered in the article. A brief description of the new scientific result obtained by the Author (what has been proven, obtained, established, defined, proposed, etc.) should be reflected here.
The significance of the statement of the problem or the results obtained for the further development of theory and practice in the area of knowledge under consideration. This section should reflect what exactly is being developed in the area of knowledge under study and how this can be applied and implemented in practice.
Compliance with the content of the study and the relevance of research methods and statistical processing of materials.
Completeness of the presented research material.
Correctness of the results obtained.
Correspondence of conclusions to the purpose and objectives of the study.
Quality of elaboration of literary sources (list of references).
Compliance of the volume of the manuscript and its individual elements (text, tables, illustrative material, bibliographic references) with the stated requirements.
Applicability of using tables, illustrative material in the article, and their compliance with the topic being presented.
The quality of the article design: style, terminology, wording.
The assessment of quantitative data analysis is carried out by the decision of the Editorial Board and should reflect:
- compliance of the choice and application of statistical methods with the research scheme and the measured variables;
- the correctness of the description of the mathematical tools in the section "Methods";
- the correctness of the description of the results and effect sizes in the "Results" section;
- compliance of conclusions with the obtained results of quantitative data analysis;
- the correctness of the presentation of the results of quantitative data analysis in the abstract.
The review is compiled according to the standard form proposed by the Editors (placed in the Online Publishing System of the journal).
The evaluation of the list of references is carried out by the decision of the Editorial Board and should reflect:
- citation of publications in the list of references;
- the relevance of the sources used;
- international representation of sources in the bibliography.
The final part of the review should contain reasonable conclusions about the manuscript as a whole and a clear recommendation on the advisability of its publication in the journal, or the need for its further revision. If the manuscript has received a negative assessment as a whole (recommendation about the inappropriateness of publication), the Reviewer must justify his conclusions.
If the manuscript does not meet one or more criteria, the reviewer indicates in the review the need to improve the article and gives recommendations to the Author on how to improve the manuscript (indicating the inaccuracies and errors made by the Author).
The Editors inform the Author about the result of the review. Articles modified by the Author are re-submitted for review to the same reviewer who made critical comments, or to another reviewer at the discretion of the Editors.
If the Author does not agree with the reviewer's comments, he can apply for a second review or withdraw the article, having previously notified the Editors of his decision.
Peer Review Results
The Editors inform about the decision of acceptance of the manuscript for publication upon the Author’s request. Possible solutions: recommend for the publication, send the article for revision, reject, recommend to another journal.
Rejection of the manuscript. In case of rejection, the Editors send a reasoned refusal to the Author within seven days. Articles are not allowed for publication if the Authors refuse to revise them or do not comply with the constructive comments of the Reviewer, and also do not reasonably contradict the Reviewer's comments.
Manuscripts rejected as a result of the peer review procedure are not re-reviewed. In case of rejection of the manuscript, a reasoned refusal to publish is sent to the Author without indicating the name of the Reviewer. Other articles by Authors of such manuscripts are accepted for consideration in the usual way.
Manuscript revision. A manuscript accepted for publication, but in need of revision, is sent to the Authors with the comments of the Reviewer and the Editors without indicating the name of the Reviewer.
If case of consent to the revision of the manuscript, the Author must provide the revised manuscript and answers to the Reviewer's comments within two months. In the revised manuscript, the changes should be highlighted. Reviewer's comments, with which the Author does not agree, and justifications shall be sent in a separate file.
In case the Author does not comply with the terms of the revision or disagrees with the fundamental remarks of the Reviewer, the Editors reserve the right to reject the manuscript.
After completion, the article is re-reviewed, and the Editors decide on the possibility of publication.
Acceptance for publication. The final decision on acceptance of the Author's article and its publishing in one of the issues of the journal is made at a meeting of the Editorial Board of the journal. The Editorial Board forms the Author of the decision upon request. Depending on the relevance of the topic and other factors, the article is recommended for the content of a particular edition number.
The Editorial Board reserves the right for literary and scientific editing of the content of the article in agreement with the Author.
If it is necessary to refine the manuscript, the Author provides a new version of the manuscript with the comments of the reviewer taken into account within two months from the date of receipt of the comments, wishes and comments of the reviewer or Editorial Board. In the text of the manuscript, the changes made should be highlighted, or indicated in the description of the manuscript (listing and description of the changes made in free form).
In case of non-compliance with the terms of revision or disagreement of the Author with the fundamental remarks of the reviewer, as well as in the absence of argumentation of the Author's disagreement with the comments put forward, the Editors reserve the right to reject the manuscript.
The finalized materials are sent by the Editors for mandatory re-reviewing.
After the article is accepted for publication, the manuscript is included in the calendar plan for the release of issues.
The Editors provide the Author a certificate of acceptance of the article for publication in the prescribed form upon request of the Author.
During the prepress preparation of the article, the Author is obliged to comply with the deadlines set by the Editors (providing the requested information, making the necessary changes to the text, etc.).
The Editorial Board reserves the right to literary and scientific editing of the content of the article in agreement with the Author.
Upon completion of scientific and literary editing, the final version of the article is sent to the Author for approval of the changes made to the text.
Within the deadline set by the Editors, the Author must approve the editing and provide a list of desired changes to be made to the text. In case of non-compliance with the established deadlines, the Editors have the right to exclude the article from the issue.
If the review contains recommendations for correcting and refining the article, the Editors of the journal send the text of the review to the Author with a recommendation to take them into account when preparing a new version of the article or refute them with reason (partially or completely). Finalization of the article should not take more than 8 weeks from the date of sending an e-mail to the Authors about the need to make changes. The article modified by the Author is re-sent for review.
If the Authors refuse to finalize the materials, they must notify the Editors in writing or orally of their refusal to publish the article. If the Authors do not return the revised version after 12 weeks from the date of sending the review, even in the absence of information from the Authors with a refusal to finalize the article, the Editors remove it from the register. In such situations, the Authors are sent an appropriate notification of the removal of the manuscript from registration due to the expiration of the time allotted for revision.
If the Author and reviewers have contradictions regarding the manuscript which are not possible to solve, the Editorial Board has the right to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the Editorial Board.
The decision to refuse publication of the manuscript is made at a meeting of the Editorial Board in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. An article not recommended by the decision of the Editorial Board for publication is not accepted for re-consideration. A notice of refusal to publish is sent to the Author by e-mail.
After the Editorial Board of the journal makes a decision on the admission of the article for publication, the Editorial Board informs the Author about this and indicates the terms of publication. The Editors of the journal send copies of reviews or a reasoned refusal to the Authors of the submitted materials.
The end date of the review process (including all rounds of the Authors making changes to the work – in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers, re-reviewing and agreeing on the corrections made with the reviewers, and reviewing the results of the review by the Editorial Board) is published as part of the article in the "Manuscript approved" block (placed at the end first page of the article when published). In case of rejection of the article or withdrawal of the article before publication by the Authors, it is stored in the electronic archive of the Online Publishing System as the date of the last Editorial decision.
The presence of a positive review is not sufficient grounds for publishing an article. The final decision on publication is made by the Editorial Board.
The original reviews are stored in the Online Publishing System of the journal.
Ownership and Management
The founder and Publisher of the journal is Moscow State University of Psychology and Education.
The journal has an Editorial Board and council, whose members are recognized experts in the subject areas included in the scope of the journal.
Editorial Team/Contact Information
The full names and affiliations of the journalꞌs Editorial Board or other governing body shall be provided on the journal’s website in the “Editorial Board of the Journal” section.
Editorial contact information, including full address, is available on the website of the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology”under the “Contacts” section.
Copyright and Licensing
The policy for copyright and licensing of the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” is clearly stated in the Publishing License Agreement to be concluded with the Author/s before the publication. The text of the Publishing License Agreement is available for free on the website of the journal.
No fees required for the processing of the manuscript and/or publication of materials in the journal are charged from the Authors. No publishing and/or peer review fees are paid.
Identification and Allegation of Research Misconduct
Publishers and Editors take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication, among others. In no case the journal or its Editors encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place. In the event that the journal’s Publisher or Editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct relating to a published article in their journal, the Publisher or Editor follows COPEꞌs guidelines (or equivalent) in dealing with allegations.
An Editor who receives conclusive evidence that a statement or conclusion presented in a published article is erroneous should inform the Publisher (and/or the relevant Scientific Society) in order to promptly publish corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other relevant statements.
When establishing the fact of unAuthorized borrowing of data (results of scientific work) or ideas, the manuscript (article) will be withdrawn from publication, even if it has already been published. The article is retracted according to the recommendations of the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (ASEP) and the retraction guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) – COPE Retraction guidelines. Version 2. November 2019.
The journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” publishes manuscripts that comply with international standards of publication ethics in scientific journals. The manuscript will be withdrawn from publication if at any stage of the review procedure, prepress, or after the publication of the article, a violation of the requirements of publication ethics is revealed by the Editors or readers.
The principles of the publication ethics of the journal are based on the recommendations of the international committee COPE — Committee on Publication Ethics, EASE — European Association of Science Editors and ASEP — Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers.
Author and Co-Author Journal Policy
The Authors of the publication can only be those persons who have made a significant contribution to the formation of the concept of the work, the development, execution and/or interpretation of the results of the presented research, as well as to the process of writing the manuscript itself (including those who carried out scientific and stylistic editing and registration in accordance with the requirements of the journal).
- The first Author. The first Author in the list of co-Authors should be the head of the Author's team of the manuscript, who took the greatest part in the process of preparing the text and is familiar with the entire process of conducting scientific work. The head of the team of Authors should also be a "correspondence Author" – to communicate with the Editors of the journal and readers (after the publication of the article).
- Co-Authors can be those who have made a significant contribution to the preparation of the text of the manuscript and the research. In case the research participants have made significant contributions in a particular area of the research project, they should be listed as having made significant contributions to the research.
Authors must ensure that:
- all participants who have made a significant contribution to the study are presented as co-Authors;
- those who did not participate in the study are not listed as co-Authors;
- all co-Authors have seen and approved the final version of the work and agreed to submit it for publication (this is confirmed by the signatures of all Authors in the Publishing License Agreement).
Complaints and Appeals
If the Author disagrees with the Reviewer's comments, he can apply for a second review or withdraw the article, having previously notified the Editors of his decision in writing. In case of complaints about the decision of the Editorial Board regarding the publication of the manuscript, the Author can file an appeal in free form by sending a letter to the email address of the Editorial Board of the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” – email@example.com. The appeal will be considered by the Editors and the Author will be informed in writing about further actions.
Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interests
All Authors are required to disclose (declare in the appropriate section of the manuscript) financial or other obvious or potential conflicts of interest that may be perceived as having an impact on the results or conclusions presented in the work. Clear and potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed as early as possible. Information about conflicts of interest received from the Authors of the manuscripts is published as part of the full text of the article.
Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality regarding information or ideas that become known to them in the course of reviewing manuscripts and should not use them for personal gain.
Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts in the event of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the Authors, companies, or other organizations associated with the submitted work.
Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts cannot be used by the Editor or Reviewer in personal research without the written consent of the Author. The Editor or Reviewer is required to maintain confidentiality regarding information or ideas that become known to them in the course of reviewing manuscripts, and should not use them for personal gain.
Editors should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts (namely, request a co-Editor, Assistant Editor, or other members of the Editorial Board to review the work instead of personally reviewing and making a decision) in case of conflicts of interest due to competitive, joint, or other relationships with Authors, companies or organizations related to the manuscript.
Research Data Sharing Policy
The Editors of the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” support the principles of the correct sharing of research data. Providing the access to the data obtained during the study, and substantiating the content of publications, is encouraged, but not required from the Author. The consent of the Authors to provide access to research data does not affect the decision to publish the article. Authors are encouraged to organize the process of exchanging research data through repositories.
The journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” supports the distribution of research data that may be required to validate the research results presented in articles published in the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology”. The Editors of the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” refer to research data as information obtained directly by the Authors (primary data), as well as data from other sources analyzed by the Authors during the study (secondary data). Research data includes any recorded on any medium factual materials used in the process of obtaining research results, in digital or non-digital form. This includes table data, code, images, audio and video files, documents, maps, processed and/or raw data.
The journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” policy does not apply to research data that is not required to confirm the validity of the results presented in published articles.
Sharing of qualitative and quantitative data that can be used to identify research participants is not required under this policy and is only done with the consent of the research participants. Sharing of other sensitive information, such as information about the habitats of endangered species, is also optional under this policy.
The Editors of the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” welcome the citation of any publicly available research data in the lists of references. References to datasets (data citations) must include a permanent identifier (e.g. DOI). References to datasets in the references should contain a minimum of information (standard citation dataset: Author, publication year, dataset name, Publisher (repository), identifier. Extended citation dataset: Author, publication year, dataset name, version, Publisher (repository), resource type, identifier), and match the log style “Cultural-Historical Psychology”.
Letters with questions about compliance with this policy are accepted at the email address firstname.lastname@example.org.
Originality and Plagiarism
Plagiarism can exist in many forms, from presenting someone else's work as his original one to copying or paraphrasing significant parts of someone else's work (without attribution) to claiming one's own rights to the results of someone else's research. Plagiarism in all forms is unethical and unacceptable.
The journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology”does not publish plagiarism, including works containing text plagiarism, idea plagiarism, and data plagiarism.
Authors of manuscripts shall submit completely original works. References to the results of the work of other Authors should be accompanied by links to the relevant primary sources (which are to be included in the list of references). Citation of a text previously published elsewhere must be formalized as direct speech with the obligatory indication of the source. The inclusion of large fragments of borrowed text in the manuscript is unacceptable.
Identification of borrowings is carried out:
- as part of scientific peer review;
- through the "ANTIPLAGIAT" plagiarism detection system;
- after the publication of manuscripts – upon the fact of readers' requests with relevant statements.
All manuscripts submitted to the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” are checked for text borrowings through the "ANTIPLAGIAT" plagiarism detection system. The identification of a significant amount of borrowed text, graphic and table elements unjustified by the goals and essence of the manuscript, as well as a low coefficient of originality of the text, gives the Editorial Board the right to require the Authors to correct the manuscript, refuse further consideration of the manuscript, refuse to publish the manuscript previously accepted for publication (withdraw the manuscript), and retract an already published article.
Identification of plagiarism of ideas and plagiarism of data is carried out as part of the scientific peer review procedure, as well as after the publication of manuscripts – upon the fact of readers' requests with relevant statements. When establishing the fact of unAuthorized borrowing of data (results of scientific work) or ideas, the manuscript (article) will be withdrawn and rejected from publication, even if it has already been published.
The journal is issued quarterly, 4 times per year.
Data Access and Retention
The journal provides instant open access to its content, based on the principle that providing free public access to research contributes to a wider global exchange of knowledge.
The articles of the journal are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY-NC license, which allows users to read, copy, distribute, and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the Author of the original work is properly cited.
Initial Data Access and Retention
The Editors reserve the right to request from the Authors the original (raw) research data, including for provision to Reviewers and Editors. Authors should be prepared to provide this kind of information to the Editorial staff. Authors are encouraged to place large amounts of data and additional materials in the appropriate open access repositories, the Editorial Board encourages the provision of data confirming the results presented in published articles.
The statement on the availability of data is sent to the Editorial Board of the journal along with the manuscript in free form. The application must contain information on where to find data supporting the results presented in the published article, including hyperlinks to publicly available archival datasets analyzed or generated during the study. Public datasets mentioned in the data accessibility statement may also be listed in the literature reference. This is especially recommended when datasets have Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs). Recommendations are available in the guide for Authors.
The journal makes full-text archives on the Russian Science Electronic Library platform.
The journal adheres to the Platinum Open Access policy, including allowing and even recommending that Authors post their articles accepted for publication on their own personal websites or in other repositories (ResearchGate and/or on the sites of repositories of their scientific organizations) both before and after publication article, indicating in the bibliographic description a link to the publication of the final version of the article in this journal. Accepted versions of articles may be published under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY-NC open license or its equivalent, but not a more permissive license.
Posting in Repositorium
The Editorial Board of the journal allows and even recommends that Authors post the versions of articles accepted for publication (preprint versions) on their pages in the Internet, on the websites of their organizations, and public repositories. After the publication of the article, the Editors require that the Authors provide a link to the final version of the article on the journal's website.
The following information shall be included when posting articles to third-party repositories:
- if the article has not yet been published, a clear statement that the manuscript has been accepted for publication or submitted to “Cultural-Historical Psychology”journal, with a link to the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” website : https://psyjournals.ru/en/journals/chp;
- for all published articles – a link to the final version of the article (including via DOI) on the website of the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology”: https://psyjournals.ru/en/journals/chp.
When citing the version of the article accepted for publication or its earlier version, readers and Authors are requested to provide a link to the final version of the article and use DOI. A ready-made citation link is located in the "For citation" section of the text of the published article, as well as on the website of the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology”: https://psyjournals.ru/en/journals/chp.
Duplicate Submission and Redundant Publication
As a rule, the Author should not publish papers describing the same research in several journals that print primary publications at once. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals at the same time is perceived as unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
As a general rule, an Author should not submit an article that has already been previously published in another journal.
Publishing some types of articles (for example, translated articles) in more than one journal is ethical in some cases if corresponds to certain conditions. Authors and Editors of interested journals should agree to the secondary publication, which will reflect the same data and interpretations as in the primary published work.
Acknowledgement of Sources
The contribution of others to the published work should always be properly displayed. Authors are required to indicate those publications that turned out to be significant for their own research. Data obtained privately – for example, during a conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties – should not be used or presented without the express written permission of the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources (for example, reviews or grant applications) should not be used without the express written permission of the Authors of the work to which they relate.
Hazards for Human or Animal Subjects
The journal &ldquoCultural-Historical Psychology;” publishes the results of studies involving humans and animals. If living people or animals were the objects of research in the study, the Authors must reflect in the manuscript that all stages of the study were carried out in accordance with the law and regulations.
The Authors must also provide information that the study protocol was considered by the ethics committee with the obligatory indication of the name of the committee (or the organization under which the committee was created), the date and number of the minutes of the meeting at which the study was approved. The Editorial Board has the right to demand certified copies of the relevant protocols from the Author. The manuscript should clearly state that voluntary informed consent has been obtained from all subjects of the study.
The Authors are personally responsible for the fact that the manuscript does not reveal in any way the identity of the participants in the study (or the description of the clinical case). The Authors should make sure that it is impossible to identify the objects of study based on the data presented in the manuscript.
The policy of the journal is governed by the Law of the Russian Federation “On Advertising”.
No advertising is placed in the “Cultural-Historical Psychology” journal.
The founder and Publisher of the journal is Moscow State University of Psychology and Education.
Direct marketing activities, including collecting of manuscripts, carried out on behalf of the journal are appropriate, targeted, and unobtrusive.
The information provided about the Publisher or journal is truthful and does not mislead readers or Authors in any way.
Information about the journal is presented in/on
- Portal of Psychological Publications PsyJournals.ru https://psyjournals.ru
- Telegram https://t.me/PsyJournals
- VKontakte https://vk.com/psyjournals
- Dzen https://dzen.ru/psyjournal
- Video-channel https://www.youtube.com/c/psyjournals
- Podcast PsyJournals Live https://psyjournals.podster.fm
Owners of network resources who have placed hyperlinks to the journal “Cultural-Historical Psychology” or the portal of psychological publications Psyjournals.ru, where the journal is located:
- Have no right to change the standard view of the viewer window (browser) or otherwise restrict or modify the presentation of the content https://psyjournals.ru/,
- Not entitled to indicate false information related to the provision of a hyperlink to https://psyjournals.ru/,
- He has no right to place on Internet pages containing hyperlinks to https://psyjournals.ru/, informational or other materials that do not correspond to the goals and principles of functioning of the portal of psychological publications Psyjournals.ru.