Review policy
Before being published, all articles undergo a review process, which aims to assess objectively the quality of the article content, its compliance with the requirements to the publication and is based on a thorough analysis of the submitted materials. The papers that receive external and internal reviews of experts in this field of research are accepted to be published. The decision on publication is made by the editorial board on the basis of expert reviews of the reviewers, taking into account the correspondence of the submitted materials to the thematic direction of the magazine, their theoretical and practical significance, relevance and scientific novelty.
The review process involves the following steps:
• compliance of the materials provided with the requirements of the journal and issues of the journal;
• all articles submitted for the review are tested for anti-plagiarism to determine the degree of originality of the author's text with the help of free-to-use software;
• all manuscripts that come to the editorial board are directed to the two reviewers according to the research profile. According to the decision of the editor-in-chief of the journal, separate articles of prominent scientists and articles of specially invited authors may be exempted from the standard review procedure;
• the review procedure can be conducted both by the members of the editorial board (internal review) and third-party highly skilled professionals with profound professional knowledge and experience in a specific scientific field (external review);
• the reviewer, as a rule, within 14 days concludes that it is possible to publish the article (fills in the standardized form), which contains the final recommendations;
• the review is conducted confidentially on the principles of double-blind review (double-blind "review" means that neither the author nor the reviewer knows about each other). The interaction between the author and the reviewers is performed through the issuing editor of the journal;
• if the reviewer's conclusion indicates the necessity of making certain corrections to the article, the article is directed to the author with the suggestion to take into account the comments when preparing an updated version of the article or to substantiate their refutation. To the revised article the author adds a letter that contains answers to all comments and explains all the changes that had been made in the article. The corrected version is re-submitted to the reviewer for the decision and preparation of the reasoned conclusion about the possibility of publication;
• the final decision on the possibility and appropriateness of the publication is taken by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal, and, if necessary, by the meeting of the editorial board as a whole.
The main purpose of the review procedure is to eliminate instances of poorly-practiced research and to ensure the harmonization and balance of interests of authors, readers, editorial board, reviewers and the institution where the study was conducted. Reviewers evaluate the theoretical and methodological level of the article, its practical value and scientific significance. In addition, the reviewers determine the compliance of the article with the principles of ethics in scientific publications and provide recommendations for the elimination of cases of their violation.
Protection of the of author’s rights
Reviewers are reported that the manuscripts are the intellectual property of the authors and are non-disclosure information. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of the reviewed article or use the materials of the article prior to its publication.
The review takes place on a confidential basis, the information about the article (terms of receipt, content, stages and peculiarities of the review, reviewers' comments and final publication decisions) is not reported to anyone except authors and reviewers. This requirement can be unfulfilled only in case there are signs or a statement about the untrustworthiness or falsification of the materials of the article. By the agreement with the authors and reviewers, reviewer’s comments may be published along with the article. In any case, the author of the reviewed thesis is given an opportunity to be made aware of the text of the review, in particular, if he does not agree with the conclusions of the reviewer.
