About the Journal

Review policy:

The article must necessarily be accompanied by a review by a leading specialist (Doctor of Science), or have an extract from the department meeting about the recommendation for publication.

All articles submitted to the editorial board are reviewed. The review procedure is focused on the most objective assessment of the content of the scientific article, determining its compliance with the journal's requirements, and involves a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the article's materials.

Review stages:

1.The author submits to the editorial board an article that meets the requirements of the journal.
2.Checking the article for anti-plagiarism. For all articles submitted for review, the degree of uniqueness of the author's text is determined using the appropriate software.
3.All manuscripts submitted to the editorial board are sent to the reviewers according to the research profile. The responsible editor of the journal appoints reviewers.
4.To review articles, both members of the editorial board of a scientific journal and third-party highly qualified specialists who have deep professional knowledge and work experience in a specific scientific direction can act as reviewers.
5.The reviewer, as a rule, makes a conclusion about the possibility of printing the article within 14 days (fills out a standardized form that contains final recommendations).
6.Reviewing is carried out confidentially according to the principles of double-blind review (two-way "blind" review, when neither the author nor the reviewer knows about each other). Interaction between the author and reviewers takes place through the responsible editor of the journal.
7.If the reviewer indicates the need to make certain corrections to the article, the article is sent to the author with a proposal to take into account the comments when preparing an updated version of the article or to refute them with arguments. To the revised article, the author attaches a letter containing answers to all the comments and explaining all the changes that have been made in the article. The corrected version is re-submitted to the reviewer for decision-making and preparation of a reasoned opinion on the possibility of publication.
8.The final decision on the possibility and expediency of publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief, and if necessary, by the meeting of the editorial board in general.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Archiving and Long-Term Open Access Preservation Policy (including information on repositories, technical infrastructure, and accessibility guarantees)

The journal implements a strategy of long-term digital preservation and unrestricted access to scholarly content in accordance with the principles of Open Access and Academic Integrity. The sustainability of the data ecosystem is ensured through the following infrastructure layers.

  1. Repository and Archiving System

To prevent data loss and ensure permanent availability of scholarly materials, a multi-level storage model is applied:

Local archive. Immediate full-text access in real time is provided through the “Archives” section on the journal’s official website. The retention period is unlimited.

Institutional repository. Metadata and full-text versions of articles are duplicated in the institutional repository of Zhytomyr Ivan Franko State University (https://eprints.zu.edu.ua/).

National deposit. In accordance with security and preservation protocols, copies of the electronic archive are deposited with the V. I. Vernadskyi National Library of Ukraine.

  1. Technical Specifications and Standardisation

Processing and storage of journal materials are conducted in compliance with interoperability and long-term preservation standards:

Data formats. The use of stable electronic formats (PDF/A, XML) ensures reproducibility and accurate citation regardless of software versions.

Indexing. The metadata structure is optimised for automated harvesting by national and international scientometric and indexing systems.

Technical monitoring. Regular back-up procedures and periodic audits of technological infrastructures are implemented to prevent data degradation and technological obsolescence.

  1. Accessibility and Identification Guarantees

The journal ensures the permanent availability of its content through the following mechanisms:

Digital identification. Each published item (article) is assigned a unique DOI (Digital Object Identifier) to guarantee stable linking and persistent access.

Standards compliance. The journal complies with OpenAIRE requirements to ensure proper indexing within global scholarly data networks.

Public access. All content in specialised databases and repositories is provided on a free and unrestricted basis (embargo-free) without temporal limitations.

Academic integrity policy:

The academic integrity policy of a scientific journal is based on the principles of honesty, transparency and respect for copyright, according to COPE recommendations. It provides for mandatory verification of manuscripts for plagiarism, self-plagiarism and fabrication of data. The editors guarantee objective review, and the authors – originality of research and proper citation of sources.

The main components of the policy: originality and plagiarism: articles must be original, not previously published. All borrowed materials must be accompanied by correct links.

Responsibility of authors: authors are responsible for the reliability of results, providing accurate data and correctly indicating co-authors.

The role of editors and reviewers: the board provides an objective assessment without conflict of interest. All manuscripts undergo strict review.

Violations and sanctions: in case of detection of violations (plagiarism, fabrication), the journal may reject the article, publish a rebuttal or prohibit the author from publishing.

The policy aims to maintain the credibility of scientific publications.

  1. Procedure for the Identification and Consideration of Appeals and Notifications
  2. General Provisions

The Editorial Board of the academic journal ensures an open, transparent, and impartial consideration of appeals, complaints, and notifications concerning editorial policy, the peer-review process, copyright issues, and possible violations of academic integrity.

The procedure for handling appeals is carried out in accordance with:

  • The Law of Ukraine “On Copyright and Related Rights”;
  • The Law of Ukraine “On Scientific and Scientific-Technical Activity”;
  • The Principles of Academic Integrity;
  • The recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
  1. Subjects Entitled to Submit Appeals

2.1. The Editorial Board considers appeals submitted by:

  • Authors (regarding editorial decisions, peer review, and review timelines);
  • Reviewers;
  • Members of the Editorial Board;
  • Third parties (readers, research institutions, and other organizations).
  1. Subject Matter of Appeals

3.1. Appeals may concern:

  • Appeals against editorial decisions;
  • Complaints about violations of peer-review procedures;
  • Notifications of possible academic integrity violations (plagiarism, self-plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data);
  • Conflicts of interest;
  • Copyright violations;
  • Comments or concerns regarding already published materials.
  1. Submission of Appeals

4.1. Appeals must be submitted in written form to the official email address of the journal’s Editorial Office.
4.2. An appeal must include:

  • The applicant’s full name;
  • Affiliation (if applicable) and contact details;
  • A clear description of the issue;
  • Reference to the relevant material;
  • Available evidence or justification.

4.3. Anonymous appeals are considered only if they contain factual information that can be verified.

  1. Preliminary Identification of the Appeal

5.1. The initial review of an appeal is carried out by the Editor-in-Chief.
5.2. At this stage, the following is determined:

  • Whether the appeal falls within the journal’s competence;
  • Whether the information provided is sufficient;
  • Whether further review is required.
  1. Consideration and Investigation

6.1. If necessary, the following may be involved in the review process:

  • Members of the Editorial Board;
  • Independent experts;
  • External specialists.

6.2. In cases of suspected serious academic integrity violations, the Editorial Board may contact the institution with which the author is affiliated.

6.3. The review is conducted in accordance with the principles of:

  • Impartiality;
  • Confidentiality;
  • Presumption of integrity;
  • Compliance with COPE recommendations.
  1. Decisions and Editorial Actions

7.1. Based on the results of the review, the Editorial Board may adopt one of the following decisions:

  • Rejection of the appeal as unfounded;
  • Re-review or additional peer review;
  • Publication of a Correction;
  • Retraction of the article.

7.2. The decision is made collectively and recorded in the editorial documentation.

  1. Notification of the Parties

8.1. The applicant and the involved parties are informed of the results of the review in written form.
8.2. The Editorial Board guarantees the confidentiality of personal data in accordance with the current legislation of Ukraine.

  1. Final Provisions

The Editorial Board of the journal (title) reserves the right to clarify and update this procedure in accordance with amendments to the legislation of Ukraine and international standards of publication ethics.

Declaration on the Use of Artificial Intelligence and AI-Supported Technologies

  1. General Provisions

This Declaration sets out the rules and conditions for the use of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in the preparation, peer review, and publication of manuscripts in the academic journals of Zhytomyr Ivan Franko State University. The Declaration aims to ensure compliance with the principles of academic integrity and the responsibility of authors, reviewers, and editors.

  1. Use of Artificial Intelligence Technologies in Manuscript Preparation

2.1. Authors are permitted to use AI technologies for text editing and translation, mathematical and statistical analysis, and data visualization. AI technologies may be used as supportive tools; however, authors remain fully responsible for monitoring and verifying the accuracy of the results obtained.
2.2. In the “Acknowledgements” section or in the “Methods” section, authors must specify which AI tools were used in the preparation of the manuscript, for example, for language improvement, grammar correction, formatting, or literature search.
2.3. AI tools may not be listed as co-authors of a scientific article.

  1. Academic Integrity and Responsibility

3.1. The author(s) bear full responsibility for the article content, the correctness and accuracy of the interpretation of the results, the accuracy of the bibliography, and compliance with ethical research standards, including in cases where AI technologies are used.
3.2. The journal assumes no responsibility for errors or inaccurate information generated by AI.
3.3. The use of AI technologies for the fabrication of data or sources, manipulation of indicators, or falsification of empirical results is strictly prohibited.

  1. Use of AI in the Peer Review Process

4.1. Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts personally. AI technologies may be used as supportive tools but not for generating a full-text review. The review must reflect the reviewer’s independent expert assessment and must not be entirely generated by AI.
4.2. Reviewers must not upload full manuscript texts to publicly accessible or unsecured AI tools, as this may violate the confidentiality of the peer-review process.

  1. Use of AI in Editorial Work

5.1. AI technologies may be used for technical checks of submitted materials; however, decisions regarding publication are made personally by the editors.
5.2. The Editorial Board may provide authors and reviewers with recommendations on the ethical and responsible use of AI.
5.3. All manuscripts submitted to the editorial office must undergo mandatory plagiarism screening, including the detection of content potentially generated by AI.
5.4. The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board make decisions on the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts based on the scientific value, quality, and originality of the research. Properly disclosed and responsible use of AI in manuscript preparation shall not constitute grounds for rejection.

  1. Transparency and Accountability

6.1. In cases of undeclared or improper use of AI technologies that violate the principles of academic integrity, the Editorial Board may reject the manuscript or suspend its publication until appropriate corrections are made.
6.2. Given the rapid development of AI technologies, the Editorial Board undertakes to review and regularly update the journal’s policy regarding their use.

Procedure for the Retraction of Published Articles

The Editorial Board of the journal (title) follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and adheres to the principles of academic integrity in matters concerning article retraction.

General Provisions

  1. This Procedure establishes the process for retracting articles published in the journal “Intermarum: History, Politics, Culture” (and other journal titles, where applicable).

1.2. The purpose of this procedure is to ensure the integrity of scholarly publications and to provide a mechanism for correcting significant errors, including those of a technical nature.
1.3. Retraction may be initiated by authors, the Editorial Board, readers, or authorized persons.

  1. Grounds for Retraction

2.1. A confirmed case of plagiarism or other forms of research misconduct in the article (including previously published information used without proper citation, permission, or justification);
2.2. Unreliable conclusions based on evidence of data fabrication or falsification;
2.3. Duplicate publication of the article in different outlets, including republication without the author’s consent;
2.4. Conflict of interest (concealed or undisclosed);
2.5. Identification of unauthorized use (without disclosure or justification) of artificial intelligence technologies in the preparation of the article or in generating graphs, tables, or other visual materials;
2.6. Retraction may also occur if the peer-review process has been compromised.

  1. Retraction Procedure

3.1. The retraction process may be initiated by the Editorial Board of the journal;
3.2. The initiator of the retraction submits a written statement providing justification for the retraction;
3.3. The statement is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief within 7 days.

  1. The Following May Initiate Retraction

4.1. The Editorial Board of another publication contacting the journal that published the article;
4.2. The author(s) of the publication;
4.3. Parties to a conflict of interest or other entities providing evidence of violations of legal, ethical, or publication standards.

  1. Retraction Review Process

5.1. The Editor-in-Chief establishes a commission composed of the Editorial Board members;
5.2. The material and the content of the complaint are analyzed;
5.3. The author(s) are given the opportunity to provide explanations or submit an appeal;
5.4. The review period shall not exceed one month from the date the complaint is received.

  1. Retraction Notice

6.1. If a decision to retract is made:

  • The article is marked as “Retracted” in both print and electronic versions of the journal;
  • A clear heading “Retraction Notice” is published, stating the reasons for retraction, their justification, and the effective date of the decision.
  1. Consequences of Retraction

7.1. The retracted article remains in the journal’s archive with an appropriate indication of its status;
7.2. The following are informed of the retraction: the author(s), indexing databases, and the academic community;
7.3. The information is published in the next issue of the journal and placed on the article’s webpage. A watermark “RETRACTED” and the date of retraction are added to the published version and the table of contents.

  1. Authors’ Rights

8.1. Authors have the right to:

  • Receive a detailed justification of the retraction decision;
  • Submit an appeal against the commission’s decision;
  • Publish a comment regarding the retraction decision.

8.2. An appeal is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief within 14 days.