Aim and Scope

Qainar Journal of Social Science is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal that publishes original research and review articles addressing a wide range of issues in the field of humanities and social sciences. The three key areas forming the conceptual foundation of the journal "society", "human being" and "social development" are central to its vision and mission.

The target audience of the journal includes academic researchers, industry practitioners, doctoral and master’s students, and other categories of authors from Kazakhstan and abroad whose research aligns with the journal’s thematic focus.

The aim of the journal Qainar Journal of Social Science is to provide an international academic platform for publishing original and relevant studies in the fields of social and human sciences, social economy, education, social policy, and sustainable development.

Key topics covered in the journal:

• social and human sciences;
• social economy;
• demography, human resources, and labor market;
• social policy and quality of life;
• gender and social inclusion;
• cultural and communication processes in modern society;
• sustainable development and social innovations;
• governance and transformation of social institutions.

The journal is registered in the RSI "Information Committee of the Ministry of Culture and Information of the Republic of Kazakhstan". Certificate of registration of the periodical No. KZ81VPY00086162 dated January 26, 2024.

Section Policies

Peer Review Process

May 30, 2025 (policy update)

The editorial board of the journal Qainar Journal of Social Science adheres to the recommendations of the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) when working with manuscripts and reviewers and when organizing the review process.

Type of review

All manuscripts submitted to the editorial office of the journal Qainar Journal of Social Science  undergo mandatory double-blind review, in which the reviewers do not know the identity of the authors, and the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers. Each manuscript is sent to at least two experts in their field of research.

Review period

The review process in the journal Qainar Journal of Social Science takes on average from 1 to 3 months. During this period, the editorial board of the journal includes time for the initial review of the manuscript, the selection of reviewers, time to prepare a review, time to finalize the article by the author and re-review, and the involvement of additional experts.

Review progress

The decision to select a reviewer for the journal Qainar Journal of Social Science is made by the Editor-in-Chief and editors.

The manuscript should contain insightful and influential ideas on the journal's directions. Ideas and conclusions (theoretical or empirical) should offer new understanding and knowledge about economics, management, and business. When receiving different opinions about the manuscript, a third expert may be involved in the work. Each article is sent to at least two experts.

The editor of the journal Qainar Journal of Social Science can give the author one of the following decisions on the manuscript:

• Accept for publication. In this case, the manuscript will be included in one of the regular issues of the journal and will be handed over to the editor for further work. The author will be notified of the publication date.
• Accept for publication after correcting the shortcomings noted by the reviewer. In this case, the author will be asked to make the changes indicated by the reviewer to the manuscript within a week. In case of elimination of deficiencies or in case of justified refusal to make changes, the manuscript is accepted for publication.
• Accept for publication after correcting the shortcomings noted by the reviewer and re-reviewing. In this case, the author will be asked to make the changes indicated by the reviewer within two weeks. The manuscript will be sent for re-review. Within 30 days, the author will receive a final decision on the manuscript's fate.
• Reject the article. In this case, the author will be sent a reasoned refusal to publish the manuscript. Refusal to publish does not prohibit authors from further sending manuscripts to the journal Qainar Journal of Social Science. However, if publication is refused due to gross violations on the part of the author, the editor-in-chief may decide to include the author in the blacklist. In this case, other articles by this author will not be considered.

The editorial board of the journal Qainar Journal of Social Science provides for three rounds of review - this means that after the first decision to finalize the article, the author has two attempts to make changes on the reviewer's recommendation or a reasoned rejection of them. If, after the third round of peer review, the expert again sends comments, the editor of the journal will invite the author to consider publishing in another journal or to submit the article for review again with the changes made in 6 months.

Conflict of interest

If the author has a conflict of interest with an expert who can potentially become a manuscript reviewer, he must notify the journal editor. The editorial board of the journal Qainar Journal of Social Science will select another reviewer if necessary.

In the process of reviewing a manuscript, a conflict may arise between the author and the reviewer. In this case, the editor of the journal Qainar Journal of Social Science has the right to appoint a new reviewer for the manuscript and involve the editor-in-chief to settle disputes.

The journal Qainar Journal of Social Science may publish articles by the editor-in-chief, his deputy, scientific editor and members of the editorial board, but there should be no abuse of official position. The manuscripts of the editors of the journal are sent for double-blind review and only external experts are involved to resolve contradictions and conflict situations. In case of a conflict regarding the fate of the manuscript of the editor-in-chief, the final decision on the possibility of publishing the article is made by the members of the editorial board.

Composition of reviewers

Experts with experience in the relevant subject area and publications on the subject of the reviewed manuscript over the past 3 years are involved in reviewing all incoming manuscripts. If the subject of the article is very narrow and/or the author claims a potential conflict of interest when reviewing by external experts, members of the editorial board and/or the editorial board may be involved in reviewing.

Principles of selection of reviewers to ensure high-quality expertise

The editorial board of the journal Qainar Journal of Social Science conducts regular work on attracting recognized experts in the field of economics, business, and management to work on the journal, as well as on timely rotation of reviewers.

Reviewers are invited to work with the journal on the recommendation of the editor-in-chief, his deputy, members of the editorial board/council, as well as the authors.

The responsible editor of the journal regularly monitors publications on the subject of the journal in the databases Scopus, Web of Science, СQASHE and sends an invitation for cooperation to the authors of publications.

If the quality of the review does not satisfy the editors, cooperation with the reviewer is terminated.

The journal Qainar Journal of Social Science does not exempt scientists from reviewing manuscripts, regardless of their status.

Copies of the reviews are kept in the editorial office of the journal Qainar Journal of Social Science for at least 5 years.

Publication Frequency

4 times per year

Open Access Policy

The journal "Qainar Journal of Social Science" provides open access to its content on the official website of the journal. All content is publicly available and free of charge for all users and/or their institutions. 

"Open Access Policy" means its free availability on the public Internet, allowing any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full texts of these articles, view them for indexing, transfer them as data to software or use them for any other legitimate purposes, without financial, legal or technical barriers, except those that are inseparable from gaining access to the Internet itself. This corresponds to the definition of open access by the Budapest Open Access Initiative.

The journal's website also contains the necessary information for authors and readers about the journal's activities: publication conditions, rules for registering and submitting manuscripts to the journal, the procedure for forming the journal and reviewing manuscripts, publication ethics, information about the editorial board, contact details of the editor-in-chief, deputy editors-in-chief and scientific editor.

Readers and authors can get acquainted with the electronic versions of the current issue of the journal and archives for previous periods on the journal's website.

Archiving

• Unified Electronic Library, Kazakhstan

Peer-Review

The official duties and responsibilities of the scientific editor of the journal "Qainar Journal of Social Science", members of the editorial board are specified in the corresponding approved job descriptions.

All scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial office of the journal "Qainar Journal of Social Science" pass mandatory double-blind peer review (the reviewer does not know the authors of the manuscript, the authors of the manuscript do not know the reviewers).

If the author of the manuscript has a conflict of interest with some scientists, the author is obliged to indicate the presence of such a conflict of interest in the cover letter, in order to avoid sending this manuscript to the specified scientist (reviewer) and biased assessments of the manuscript.

Peer review of manuscripts is carried out by members of the editorial board and editorial team, as well as invited reviewers - leading experts of the relevant scientific field. The decision on the choice of a reviewer is made by scientific editor. A review should prepared and sent to the editorial office within 10 working days from the date of the article acceptance.

Each reviewer has the right to refuse the review in case of conflict of interest that can affects the perception and interpretation of the manuscript. A reasoned refusal should be sent to the editorial office within two working days after it’s receipt.

If the review contains recommendations for revision of the manuscript, the editorial team sends it to the author to revise the manuscript or to refute them reasonably (partially or completely). The revision of the manuscript should not take more than one week from the moment of sending an electronic message to the authors about the revision. The revised manuscript by the author should be re-sent for review.

If the authors refuse to revise the manuscript, they must notify the editorial office about their refusal to publish it. If the authors do not return the revised version in a week from the date of sending the review, the editorial team rejects to work with it further. In such cases, the authors should be notified on the withdrawal of the manuscript from registration due to the expiration of the deadline for revision.

If the author and reviewers have insoluble contradictions regarding the manuscript, the editorial team has the right to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict cases the decision is made by the editor-in-chief at a meeting of the editorial board.

The decision to reject the publication in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers should be made at a meeting of the editorial board. A manuscript not recommended for publication by the decision of the editorial board is not accepted for re-consideration. An author should be notified about that refusal by e-mail.

After the editorial board makes a decision on the publication of a manuscript, an author should be notified about the publication date.

A positive review is not a sufficient reason for the publication of a manuscript. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.

The originals of the reviews are kept in the editorial office for 5 years.

Editorial office sends copies of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan upon receipt of the corresponding request.

For reviewers

Reviewers should adhere to the basic principles when evaluating scientific manuscripts:

- The consent of the reviewer:

1) to peer review a manuscript in case of appropriate research background;

2) to timely submit the review.

- The reviewer must respect the confidentiality of the expert assessment.

- The reviewer gives an objective and constructive assessment of a manuscript.

- The reviewer may not use the information from the manuscript either in their own interests or in the interests of third parties.

- The reviewer should not make derogatory or discrediting comments in the review.

- The reviewer must inform on potential conflicts of interest by contacting the editorial board, if it is impossible to make a sole decision.

To conduct a review in English, you can use the website https://bentham.manuscriptpoint.com/manuals/Review_ tutorial. pdf/

Reviewer Support Policy:

The reviewer receives points for each written review (1 point – 20% discount if  their manuscript is accepted for publication), while the accumulated points are saved until they are fully used (for the reviewer personally or other co-authors).

Peer review should be conducted according to the following criteria:

1. Compliance with the subject and norms of the journal

2. Relevance (originality) of the topic

3. Novelty of the research, scientific and practical significance

4. Correspondence of the content to the topic

5. The correctness of the description of approaches /methods

6. Significance and value of conclusions and obtained research results

7. Presentation (grammar, clarity)

9. The level of technical quality

10. Clear research goal and matching the results to the goal

11. The validity of the citation literature

12. Completeness of the abstract and compliance with the requirements

In general, the review should contain a competent analysis of the manuscript and an objective reasoned assessment with clearly justified comments and recommendations.

Authors of a manuscript should be allowed to read the review (without information about the reviewer).

In the summary of the review, the following recommendations can be given:

- Accept with minor changes;

- Adopt with significant changes;

- Reject in the current form, but with the possibility of re-submission;

- To reject without the possibility of re-submission.

Publishing Ethics

The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal "Qainar Journal of Social Science" are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org,  and requirements for peer-reviewed journals, elaborated by the "Elsevier" Publishing House (in accordance with international ethical rules of scientific publications)

1. Introduction

1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for society-owned or sponsored journal: "Qainar Journal of Social Science"

1.2.Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.

1.3. Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal programmes record «the minutes of science» and we recognise our responsibilities as the keeper of those «minutes» in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.

2. Duties of Editors

2.1.Publication decision – The Editor of a learned "Qainar Journal of Social Science"  is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the "Qainar Journal of Social Science" journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

2.2.Fair play – An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

2.3.Confidentiality – The editor and any editorial staff of "Qainar Journal of Social Science" 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.

2.4.Disclosure and Conflicts of interest

2.4.1. 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. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) 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 (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

2.5.Vigilance over published record – An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.

2.6.Involvement and cooperation in investigations – 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 (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.

3. Duties of Reviewers

3.1.Contribution to Editorial Decisions – Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

3.2.Promptness – 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 of "Qainar Journal of Social Science" and excuse himself from the review process.

3.3.Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.

3.4.Standard and objectivity – Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

3.5.Acknowledgement of Sources – Reviewers  should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

3.6.Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

3.6.1.Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

3.6.2. 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.

4. Duties of Authors

4.1.Reporting standards

4.1.1. Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

4.1.2. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.

4.2.Data Access and Retention – 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 (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

4.3.Originality and Plagiarism

4.3.1. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4.4.Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

4.4.1. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.

4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at www.icmje.org.

4.5.Acknowledgement of Sources – Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

4.6.Authorship of the Paper

4.6.1. 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.

4.6.2. 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.

4.7.Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

4.7.1. If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

4.7.2. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

4.8.1. 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.

4.8.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.

4.9. Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of "Qainar Journal of Social Science" journal and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.

5. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)

5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of "Qainar Journal of Social Science" in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

5.2. The publisher should support "Qainar Journal of Social Science" journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.

5.3. Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.

5.4. Publisher should provide specialised legal review and counsel if necessary.

The section is prepared according to the files (http://health.elsevier.ru/attachments/editor/file/ethical_code_final.pdf) of Elsevier publisher (https://www.elsevier.com/) and files (http://publicationethics.org/resources) from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE - http://publicationethics.org/). 

Founder

Establishment of the Q University, 050020/A05B6C4, Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty, Baizakov Street, 125/185 NP 4 (ug. Aiteke bi str.) 

Author fees

Publication in "Qainar Journal of Social Science" is free of charge for all the authors.

The journal doesn't have any Article processing charges.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

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.

Plagiarism statement

The editorial board of the journal Qainar Journal of Social Science, when reviewing all manuscripts for compliance with formal requirements (manuscript design) and before sending them for review, checks for the presence of borrowed text in the manuscript through a plagiarism verification system. By submitting their manuscripts to the journal authors are agreeing to any necessary originality checks the manuscript may have to undergo during the publication process.

The journal Qainar Journal of Social Science stands for compliance with the principles of ethics and integrity of science. The editorial board of the journal has chosen a reliable partner in ensuring the quality of scientific publications and concluded a cooperation agreement with JSC "Anti-Plagiarism". This service was created by Russian developers in 2005 and is actively operating in academic institutes, universities, publishing houses, etc. In Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus and other countries of the world. The analysis of the works is carried out on the basis of a specialized information search and processing system. The program shows clear and manageable reporting data, coloring all the similarities of the text and forming a list of links to primary sources, automatic detection of replacement of characters and letters in the text, as well as reverse automatic replacement of correct ones in the text and search for plagiarism of the modified version.

Only original manuscripts and/or those manuscripts in which, according to the results of the plagiarism check, the originality is more than 85% are sent for further review. If the manuscript does not meet the design requirements set in the journal and is not an original work based on the results of a plagiarism check, the manuscript is returned to the author for correspondence for making appropriate changes and re-sending the manuscript for consideration by the editorial board via the electronic platform of the journal.

Literal copying

Copying the work word by word, in whole or in parts, without permission or confirmation of the source. Literal copying is clearly plagiarism and is easily detected by plagiarism software.

Substantial copying

Replication of a significant part of the work without permission and confirmation of the source. When determining what is "substantial", both the quantity and quality of the copied content are important. Quality is measured by the relative cost of the copied text compared to the entire text. Where the essence of the work was copied, even not a very large part of it, plagiarism is identified.

Paraphrasing

Copying can be done without the literal copying used in the original work. This type of copying is known as paraphrasing, and it may be the most difficult type of plagiarism that can be detected.

Plagiarism in all its forms is unacceptable and will lead to the immediate rejection of the article along with possible sanctions against the authors. The authors of an article in which a provable fact of plagiarism was discovered are not allowed to submit articles to the journal "Qainar Journal of Social Science" for the next 3  years.

Preprint and postprint Policy

Prior to acceptance and publication in Qainar Journal of Social Science, authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.

As part of the submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in "Qainar Journal of Social Science" we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.

Glossary (by SHERPA)

Data sharing policy

Authors are encouraged to make the research data that support their publications available but are not required to do so. The decision to publish will not be affected by whether or not authors share their research data.

Definition of research data

This policy applies to the research data that would be required to verify the results of research reported in articles published in the Journal Qainar Journal of Social Science. Research data include data produced by the authors (“primary data”) and data from other sources that are analyzed by authors in their study (“secondary data”). Research data includes any recorded factual material that are used to produce the results in digital and non-digital form. This includes tabular data, code, images, audio, documents, video, maps, raw and/or processed data.

Definition of exceptions

The data that is not a subject to public disclosure may be delivered as follows: deposited in science data repositories with limited access or preliminary anonymized. An author can also publicly deliver metadata only and/or description of the method of access to the data under requests from other scholars.

Data repositories

The preferred mechanism for sharing research data is via data repositories. Please see or https://repositoryfinder.datacite.org/ for help finding research data repositories.

Data citation

The Editorial Board of the Journal Qainar Journal of Social Science  welcomes access to data under Creative Commons Licenses. Editorial Board of the Journal Qainar Journal of Social Science does not insist on the obligatory use of Creative Commons in case when the data is deposited in the repositories of the third party. The Publisher of the Journal Qainar Journal of Social Science does not assert any copyrights for the data submitted by the author together with the article.  

Questions regarding the observation of that policy shall be sent to the executive secretary of the Journal Qainar Journal of Social Science.