Peer-review
Scientific articles submitted to the editorial office undergo a peer-review procedure. The journal applies two forms of article review: internal review (manuscripts reviewed by members of the editorial board) and external review (manuscripts reviewed by leading experts in the relevant field).
The editorial office follows a double-blind peer review policy, in which the reviewer does not know the identity of the author and the author does not know the identity of the reviewer. In order to ensure compliance with the double-blind peer review procedure, authors are recommended to submit their manuscripts as two separate files:
the first file containing full information about the author(s);
the second file containing the manuscript of the scientific article.
The editorial board determines whether the manuscript corresponds to the scope of the journal and complies with the submission requirements, and then sends it for review to a specialist holding a Doctor of Sciences or PhD degree whose scientific specialization is closely related to the topic of the article and who meets the requirements for providing high-quality independent peer review.
The review period in each individual case is determined by the editorial board with the aim of ensuring the most prompt publication of the article possible; however, as a rule, it does not exceed one month.
The reviewer evaluates the manuscript according to the following criteria:
- relevance of the topic and scientific novelty;
- correspondence between the title and the content;
- quality of the literature review;
- appropriateness of the methodology;
- reliability of the results;
- validity of the conclusions;
- quality of formatting and language.
If the reviewer provides comments, the manuscript is returned to the author for revision. If the reviewer provides repeated comments after revision, the manuscript is considered rejected and will not be further considered by the editorial board.
In case of rejection, the editorial office provides the author with a reasoned decision explaining the grounds for refusal.
A manuscript that has not been recommended for publication by the reviewer will not be accepted for reconsideration.
The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient basis for publication. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board and the academic council of the university.
After the editorial board makes a decision to accept the manuscript for publication, the editorial office informs the author and indicates the expected publication timeframe. The original copies of the reviews are stored in the editorial board and editorial office of the scientific journal for at least three years.
The author has the right to appeal the rejection decision within 10 days. The appeal is considered by an independent member of the editorial board.
