Skip to main content

Basic Journal Information


1) Journal Title: SCIENTIFIC CULTURE (Journal of Applied Science & Technology to Cultural Heritage Issues)

2) URL:

3) Alternative Title: SC

4) Journal ISSN (online & printed version)/Frequency:(online) 2407-9529; (print) 2408-0071(January, May and September) – Year launched: 2015

5) Publisher: Ioannis Liritzis & Founder 2015

6) Society or Institution hosting: Key Research Institute of Yellow River Civilization and Sustainable Development & Collaborative, Innovation Center on Yellow River Civilization jointly built by Henan Province and Ministry of Education

7) Repository Host: dnhost (

8) Name of contact for this journal: Professor Ioannis Liritzis, Editor-in-Chief/ Founder 

9) Contact’s email address:;;;

10) SC email address:;

11) Country of the publisher: Greece, and host: China

12) Journal’s article processing charges: Cost of processing and finally accepted Open Access publication is 400 Euro.
(it covers submission and review system, copy-editing, typesetting and conversion, indexing and permanent online preservation of published articles. Fees for Regular and Rapid (timewise) Review, see 47 below.

13) Journal’s article submission charges: No charge. 

14) Digital archiving policy of the journal in zenodo: as e.g: Zenodo is hosted by CERN (Switzerland), exposes its data to OpenAIRE and complies with the Open Access demands from the EC and the ERCs (

15) Open Access downloading of full-text of the journal: Free.

16) Article identifiers the journal use: DOI is provided.

17) Provision of article metadata?: Yes

18) Journal’s download statistics: Yes through Google analytics, and as most read/downloaded articles at HOME (

19) The First calendar year in which a complete volume of the journal provided online Open Access content and printed (when required) to the Full Text of all articles: 2015

20) Formats of full text are available: .pdf

21) Some Keyword(s) that best describe SC:

  • Archaeology
  • Ancient technology
  • Conservation of material of cultural heritage
  • Science in Arts
  • Geoarchaeology
  • Environmental Archaeometry
  • Archaeoastronomy
  • Cultural Heritage
  • Archaeological Sciences
  • New Technologies in Cultural Heritage
  • Spectroscopic Analysis in Ancient Material Culture
  • Human-Environmental Interactions in the Past
  • Interdisciplinary approaches to tangible & intangible Cultural Heritage

22) Language(s) that the Full Text of the articles is published : English.

Quality and Transparency of the Editorial Process

23) The URL for the Editorial Board page is given at The origin of editors and members has a Worldwide coverage (see World map in Editorial Board).

24) Review process for papers: Double Blind Peer Review. For each assigned reviewer notification to publons is made. (

Relevant information on the Review Process is given in the section Authors & Reviewers. SCpays particular attention to the role of peer review following the Elsevier Guidelines: of how to contact a review (
SC uses verification of peer review powered by publons and encourages reviewers to sing in to publons (

25) The EDITORIAL BOARD of the journal will be intolerable and inflexible with malpractices such as PLAGIARISM, the REPRODUCTION OF ARTICLES PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED in other media or FRAUDULENT RESEARCH. To resolve these situations, it will follow the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)(

26) Journal’s policy of screening for plagiarism: Plagiarism is strictly forbidden, and by submitting the article for publication the authors agree that the publishers have the legal right to take appropriate action against the authors, if plagiarism or fabricated information is discovered.Plagiarism is condemned and discarded and authors are blocked from future submission to SC. Reviewers are urge to check for plagiarism using available softwares (

27) Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

(based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE‘s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)


It is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor and editor-in-chief, the peer reviewer and the publisher.

Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

28) Publication decisions

The editor of the SC is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.

The editor may be guided by the policies of the 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 in making this decision.

29) Fair play

An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

30) Confidentiality

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.

31) Disclosure and conflicts of interest

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.


Duties of Reviewers (see also Authors & Reviewers)

32) 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.

33) 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 and excuse himself from the review process.

34) Confidentiality

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

35) Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. In case of disagreement more referees are asked and finally Editors decide.

36) 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.

37) Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

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.

Duties of Authors (see also Authors & Reviewers)

38) Reporting standards

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 behavior and are unacceptable.

39) Data Access and Retention

Authors are 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.

40) Originality and Plagiarism

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

41) Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

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

42) 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.

43) Authorship of the Paper

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. For research articles with several authors, a short paragraph specifying their individual contributions must be provided following CRediT taxonomy ( based on Brand et al., 2015, Learned Publishing, 28: 151–155, Doi:10.1087/20150211.

44) Legal & ethical criteria of studied cultural material

If the work involves cultural assets the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript and state official permit granted and/or disclose illicit trafficking objects according to UNESCO standards (

45) Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

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.

46) Fundamental errors in published works

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.

47) The average number of weeks between submission and publication are: a) for Normal Review: 15 weeks, b) for Rapid Review: 2 weeks. For rapid review charges contact the journal Managing Editor (

48) Openess of the Journal
All the content of the journal for each issue is available immediately upon online publication. Once the proofs are made the articles are uploaded open access / free download as an Early View.

49) Copyright/ Open Access

  • SC follows the Budapest Open Access Initiative definition of Open Access.
  • Articles published in SC will be Open Access articles distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
  • SC allows readers to read, download, share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format), adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially), search or link to the full text of its articles, and for any other lawful purpose, in concordance to Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
  • Journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions: Yes
  • Journal allows the author(s) to retain publishing rights without restrictions: Yes
    Any use of articles, figures, tables should cite the source of publication in Scientific Culture (names, title, volume, issue, page number(s)).

50) From 2023 Onwards:

Declaration of using AI in scientific writing
The advice provided below only applies to the writing process and does not apply to the use of AI technologies to analyze and derive insights from data as part of the research process. Where generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies are used in the writing process, authors should only employ them to increase readability and language. AI should be used with human monitoring and control, and writers should carefully evaluate and revise the results, as AI can provide authoritative-sounding output that is wrong, incomplete, or prejudiced. AI and AI-assisted technologies should not be designated as authors or co-authors, nor should they be acknowledged as such.
Authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to and performed by humans, as outlined in Elsevier’s AI policy for authors.
Authors should follow the directions below to declare the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process in their paper. A statement will be included in the published work. Please keep in mind that writers are ultimately liable and accountable for the work’s content.
Disclosure instructions
Authors must declare the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process by including a statement at the conclusion of their work, before the References list, in the core manuscript file. The declaration should be inserted in a new section headed ‘Declaration of Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process’.
Statement: During the preparation of this work the author(s) used [NAME TOOL / SERVICE] in order to [REASON]. After using this tool/service, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the publication.
This declaration does not apply to the use of basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, references etc. If there is nothing to disclose, there is no need to add a statement.