Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

Article is accepted for consideration only if it meets the requirements for author's original materials. 

All manuscripts submitted to the Editorial Staff necessarily undergo the procedure of double-blind peer review.

Chief Editor (deputy chief editor) provides an initial review of the article and checks for plagiarism (originality of the text should be at least 95 % of the total value). At this stage, we may reject articles that do not meet the profile of the journal, or articles that lack formalization required by edition.

Further, the article is transferred to the editor of the relevant section of the journal. He is the first reviewer of the article. Then, the article is sent to an independent examination to the reviewer from Editorial Council or Advisory Council, who is skilled in the appropriate field of science, has doctorate or PhD degree. The reviewer considers the directed article within two weeks from receipt and submits results of the review to the editorial review.

The editors recommend the use of a standard form for reviewing. The reviewer can recommend the article for publication; recommend publishing after revision in light of comments; not to recommend the article for publication. If the reviewer recommends an article publishing after revision in light of comments, or does not recommend an article for publication, review must contain specified reasons of such a decision.

If the paper is rejected, Editorial Staff sends a reasoned refusal to the author.

The presence of a substantial proportion of the criticisms of the reviewer with an overall positive recommendation allows referring material to polemical category and printing it "in order of discussion".

In the conclusion about the expediency of publishing an article reviewer briefly summarizes the contents of the article, marks matching the title, presence of scientific novelty, relevance of subject, evaluates cogency of task decision, knowledge of the scientific literature on discussed question, logic, consistency and style of presentation.

Article may be sent for further review under sufficient justification.

A scanned anonymous copy of the received review is sent the author by e-mail. Upon the presence of remarks author should finalize the article, and then it will be sent to the same reviewer. If approved, the article is published.

Editorial Staff provides reviewing of all incoming materials to the editorial office that are corresponding to its subject, for the purpose of their peer review. All reviewers are acknowledged as experts on the subject of peer-reviewed materials. Reviews are stored in the publishing house and editorial office for 5 years.