Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

The Camera Praehistorica maintains the highest standards of publication ethics as defined in the Copyright Act of Russia (Chapter 70) and international COPE Guide to Ethical Editing ( 


Authors’ ethics

Authors are fully responsible for the contents of their papers. They guarantee that submitted Manuscript is original paper that have not been published before and are not pending publication elsewhere. Papers that report on the results of non-authorized excavations or other materials that were acquired illegally are unacceptable.

Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. 

The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms is unacceptable. Information obtained by private communication, correspondence or discussions with third parties should not be used without the express written consent of the correspondent source. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. 

In accordance with Article 29 of The Constitution of the Russian Federation, the papers that are submitted for publication must not incite to extremism, racial or ethnic hatred. 

The authors should discuss arguable issues on the principles of scientific correctness towards their colleagues.

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Authors are obliged to participate in peer review process.

In the case of violation of the above principles, the editorial board reserves the right to reject the paper.


Editors’ ethic

Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article. 

They should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. Decision on the publication of article is taken on the base of obligatory double-blind peer review of the manuscript. 

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. 

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. 

Editors should refuse from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if conflicts of interest are revealed after publication. In case a conflict of interest is discovered after the article is published a corresponding correction must be applied. An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher

Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. If the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, may be relevant.


Reviewers' ethic

Reviewers are qualified experts in their field. The reviewer’s personal data are not disclosed to the authors. This guarantees the unbiased motivated reviews and assures a freedom for critical comments concerning the content of the articles to be published.

 Any manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. They should point out relevant published work which is not yet cited. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

 Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. 


Publishers’ ethic

CP publisher is Peter the Great Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (Kunstkamera) of the Russian Academy of Sciences. It is committed to work with editors to define clearly the respective roles of publisher and of editors in order to ensure the autonomy of editorial decisions, without influence from advertisers or other commercial partners. 

CP publisher ensures the integrity and transparency of each published article with respect to: conflicts of interest, publication and research funding, publication and research ethics, cases of publication and research misconduct, confidentiality, authorship, article corrections, clarifications and retractions, and timely publication of content. 

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of a correction statement or erratum or, in the most severe cases, the retraction of the affected work.