Todos los volúmenes y ediciones en esta revista
Editorial System https://editorialsystem.com/minib
List of contents:
Open Access Statement
Open Access License
Gide for Authors
Review Guidelines
Open Access Statement
This is an open access journal that provides free, immediate, and unrestricted online access to all its published content for readers around the world.
Gide for Authors:
1. Originality and Copyright
Submitted manuscripts must be original, unpublished, and not under review by any other journal. Authors retain full copyright and grant the journal a non-exclusive publication license under the Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.
Statements concerning originality, copyright, authorship, and personal data processing are completed directly in the editorial system. Separate declaration forms should not be submitted.
The editorial office documents all instances of research misconduct, including ghostwriting and guest authorship. In confirmed cases, appropriate institutions will be notified.
2. Accepted Types of Papers
The journal accepts the following types of contributions:
- Research articles (empirical, theoretical, analytical)
- Review articles (state-of-the-art)
- Case studies — prepared in line with academic standards, with a theoretical background, method of analysis, and generalizable findings
3. Language of Publication
The journal publishes articles in English only. Authors are responsible for language accuracy and ensuring the text is clear, precise, and understandable to readers beyond their immediate specialization. Poor language quality may result in rejection at the preliminary review stage.
4. Editorial Process and Timeline
The editorial process includes the following steps:
- Initial screening – within 10 working days of submission, the editorial team decides whether to proceed.
- Editorial (technical) review – within the next 10 working days, authors receive comments on structure, style, and formatting.
- Double-blind peer review – conducted by two independent reviewers within a maximum of three calendar months. Authors must respond to each comment.
- Additional review rounds – where applicable.
- Final decision – taken by the editorial board based on the reviews.
Authors must respond to all reviewer comments in detail if revisions are requested. Any objections must be justified. Revised manuscripts must be returned within the deadline provided. Failure to respond may result in suspension of the publication process.
The editorial board reserves the right to edit or shorten manuscripts where necessary.
5. Article Length and Formatting
The recommended length is 6,000–8,000 words, including tables, figures, footnotes, and references. Longer or shorter texts may be accepted if justified.
Manuscripts should be structured and divided with appropriate subheadings. When abbreviations are used (e.g., institutional names), the full name should be given at first mention, followed by the abbreviation.
Submit the main manuscript file in doc/docx format. Tables, figures, and illustrations should be submitted as separate high-resolution files (minimum 300 dpi). Preferred formats: JPEG for figures, Excel for tables, and PPTX for charts.
Author details (name, affiliation, ORCID, email) must be entered into the editorial system and not appear in the uploaded manuscript file.
6. Article Structure
Authors are advised to follow the IMRAD structure following international academic standards:
- Introduction – topic rationale, literature review, research aim, research questions, hypotheses,
- Methods – description of research approach, data, techniques, tools,
- Results – presentation of findings,
- Discussion – interpretation, comparison with literature, limitations, implications,
- Conclusion – summary and main conclusions.
Authors are encouraged to refer to current sources from full-text databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, ProQuest, and EBSCO.
During the submission process, authors must enter:
- Complete author information: name, affiliation, ORCID, email, CRediT contribution,
- Abstract (150–250 words),
- 3–6 keywords,
- Funding information (if applicable),
- Acknowledgments (if applicable).
Abstracts should be 150–250 words and follow a structured format:
- Purpose – the aim of the research,
- Design/methodology/approach – methods used,
- Findings – main results,
- Practical implications – relevance for practice,
- Originality/value – novelty and contribution.
Tables, charts, and figures must be submitted as separate files.
Accepted formats:
- Images: JPEG, PNG (min. 300 dpi),
- Charts and data: XLSX,
- Technical or presentation graphics: PDF, PPTX (if necessary, but keep to a minimum),
- Manuscript text should include references to attached files by file name or number.
The use of AI-based tools (e.g., for editing, translation, summarization) is permitted under the following conditions:
- All intellectual content and conclusions remain the original work of the authors.
- No part of the text is AI-generated in place of actual research, nor does it contain fabricated data or sources.
- Confidential, unpublished, or licensed data must not be submitted to AI systems.
10. Fees and Copyright
The journal does not charge publication fees or author honoraria.
All content is published open access under the Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.
Review Guidelines:
Review Process
All submissions to the journal Marketing of Scientific and Research Organizations (MINIB) undergo a multi-stage peer-review process to ensure the high scientific quality of published content and provide a fair and objective evaluation of each manuscript.
follow the double-blind review model, meaning that authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the process.
1. Review Stages
Each submitted manuscript is first assessed for alignment with the journal’s scope and formal editorial requirements.
The editorial board conducts an initial content evaluation – only manuscripts that meet essential criteria are forwarded for scientific peer review.
Each manuscript is assigned to two independent reviewers who:
- are not members of the editorial board,
- are not affiliated with the same institution as the author(s),
- have no known personal or professional ties with the author(s) to the best of the editorial team’s knowledge.
2. Review Format and Procedure
Reviews are submitted in writing using the journal’s standard review form.
Reviewers issue one of the following final recommendations:
- accept without revisions,
- accept with minor revisions,
- accept with major revisions,
- reject.
In the case of major revisions, the manuscript is returned to one or both reviewers for reassessment to verify whether the revisions meet the journal’s quality standards.
The review form can be downloaded at the bottom of this page or directly from the following link: [Internal Review Form – download], [External Review Form - download] 3. Editorial Decisions
- Two positive reviews allow the manuscript to proceed to the next stage of the publication process.
- If one review is positive and the other negative, the editorial board decides whether to continue the process, considering both opinions.
- Two negative reviews result in the automatic rejection of the manuscript.
The final decision on publication always rests with the editorial board.
4. Review Criteria
Reviewers are asked to assess the manuscript’s alignment with the journal’s scope, as well as its scientific originality and value. The key evaluation criteria include:
- relevance and novelty of the research problem,
- theoretical or practical contribution,
- methodological soundness (if applicable),
- quality of data and analysis,
- adequacy and currency of the cited literature,
- structure, language, and clarity of argumentation.
Reviews remain confidential and are not made public.
The identities of individual reviewers are not disclosed to the authors.
Once a year, the journal publishes a list of external reviewers who collaborated with the editorial board.
The journal pays a reviewer’s fee for each completed review.
Ethical Guidelines for Publication
Marketing of Scientific and Research Organizations (MINIB) adheres to the highest standards of publishing ethics, in line with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All participants in the publication process — authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher — are expected to uphold integrity, transparency, and accountability in scientific communication.
Responsibilities of Authors
- Submissions must be original, unpublished, and not under consideration by another journal.
- All listed authors must have made a significant contribution to the work; other contributions (e.g. technical, editorial, or financial) should be acknowledged separately.
- Ghostwriting and guest authorship are strictly prohibited.
- Authors are responsible for the accuracy of the data presented, including negative or inconclusive results.
- Any manipulation of data, images, or citations is not acceptable.
- All potential conflicts of interest, including non-financial ones, must be disclosed.
- Research involving humans or animals must have appropriate ethics approval and informed consent.
- Authors are obliged to correct or retract their article in the event of any errors.
- Reviews must be thorough, objective, and submitted within the agreed timeframe.
- Reviewers must maintain confidentiality and avoid conflicts of interest.
- Any suspicion of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or other misconduct should be reported to the editorial office immediately.
- Third parties may not be involved in the review process without prior editorial approval, and co-reviewers must be named.
- Editorial decisions are based solely on the article’s scientific merit, originality, and relevance to the journal’s scope.
- Each manuscript is evaluated through a double-blind peer-review process by two independent reviewers.
- The editorial office ensures the confidentiality of submissions and actively prevents conflicts of interest.
- In case of suspected misconduct, the editors will act in accordance with COPE guidelines, which may include publishing a correction, issuing a retraction, or notifying relevant institutions.
Marketing of Scientific and Research Organizations (MINIB) adheres to the highest standards of publishing ethics, in line with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All participants in the publication process — authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher — are expected to uphold integrity, transparency, and accountability in scientific communication.
Responsibilities of Authors
- Submissions must be original, unpublished, and not under consideration by another journal.
- All listed authors must have made a significant contribution to the work; other contributions (e.g. technical, editorial, or financial) should be acknowledged separately.
- Ghostwriting and guest authorship are strictly prohibited.
- Authors are responsible for the accuracy of the data presented, including negative or inconclusive results.
- Any manipulation of data, images, or citations is not acceptable.
- All potential conflicts of interest, including non-financial ones, must be disclosed.
- Research involving humans or animals must have appropriate ethics approval and informed consent.
- Authors are obliged to correct or retract their article in the event of any errors.
- Reviews must be thorough, objective, and submitted within the agreed timeframe.
- Reviewers must maintain confidentiality and avoid conflicts of interest.
- Any suspicion of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or other misconduct should be reported to the editorial office immediately.
- Third parties may not be involved in the review process without prior editorial approval, and co-reviewers must be named.
- Editorial decisions are based solely on the article’s scientific merit, originality, and relevance to the journal’s scope.
- Each manuscript is evaluated through a double-blind peer-review process by two independent reviewers.
- The editorial office ensures the confidentiality of submissions and actively prevents conflicts of interest.
- In case of suspected misconduct, the editors will act in accordance with COPE guidelines, which may include publishing a correction, issuing a retraction, or notifying relevant institutions.