Peer-reviewing Process

The  journal employs the double blind review procedure (the author does not know the name and affiliation of the expert and vice versa). The interaction of authors and reviewers is provided by the Editor-In-Chief, Vice Editor in Chief, and Executive Editor. Authors and reviewers do not interact directly with each other.

An objective independent review provides an assessment of the content of the article, its relevance, compliance with the profile of the journal, the adequacy of the review of scientific literature, comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the covered study.

The stages of reviewing are:

  1. Automated verification of compliance with academic integrity in the article (including checking for plagiarism using Unicheckand other technical means).
  2. Preliminary assessment of the article scope, content and format relevance by the members of the editorial board (up to 2 weeks, excluding vacation and next issue preparation time).
  3. Remarks from the editorial board or rejection of the submission (frontdesk acceptance and further review or frontdesk rejection.
  4. Selection of independent experts in the field relevant to the submission and their appointment as the reviewers.
  5. Reviewing the article for 1 month.
  6. Transfer to the author comments and recommendations of the reviewer. Finalization of the article by the author.
  7. Approval of the revised article.
  8. If necessary, repeating the fourth — seventh stages or appointing an additional reviewer.

For review, the editorial board invites experienced scholars in scope-specific academic fields.

 

The reviewers are expected to:

- estimate theoretical and methodological quality of the article, its applied value if applicable

 - ascertain the conformity between the article and the ethic principles of scientific publications

- express criticism and provide recommendations

 - provide their conclusion whether the manuscript: ·

  • Should be rejected
  • requires additional reviewing
  • Requires corrections
  • requires technical reviewing
  • May be printed as submitted

The reviewers are informed that the submitted manuscript is the intellectual property of the author and should not be disclosed to a third party.

 

The reviewers are expected to upload their decision and the file with their remarks within 1 month since the date of accepting the role.