The review process
The articles, submitted to the journal's editorial board and meeting the formal requirements for design and originality, are subject to mandatory peer review. The review is carried out using a double-blind review method. Double review is conducted confidentially, the author is not informed of the reviewer’s name, and the reviewer is not informed of the article author’s name.
The journal editor conducts an initial assessment of the article for compliance with the journal profile. Reviewers are selected based on the topic of the work with the corresponding academic and scientific degree and level of expertise. The review period is up to 6 weeks.
Reviewers are notified that the article submitted to them for review is the intellectual property of the author (s) and is classified as confidential information.
If the author(s) of an article has a conflict of interest with other scientist(s), he/she/it is obliged to indicate the existence of such a conflict of interest in the e-mail, in order to avoid sending this article to the specified reviewer and biased assessments of the article.
As a result of the article evaluation, the reviewer makes the following decision:
- recommend article for publication;
- recommend the article for publication after revision, taking into account the comments;
- recommend to reject article.
The editor sends the results of the assessment to the author without specifying the reviewers' data. If the review contains recommendations for correcting and refining the article, the editorial board of the journal sends the text of the review to the author of the article with a proposal to take these recommendations into account when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them in a reasoned manner (partially or completely).
The author(s) may refuse to correct comments, make changes to the article and re-submit it to the editorial board of the journal. If the author does not provide a revised version of the article within 10 calendar days from the date of sending the reviewer's response, the editorial board will remove the article from the register.
The article, revised by the author, is re-submitted for review.
An article that has received positive opinions from two reviewers and the editor-in-chief is recommended for publication in the journal in the order in which it was accepted for publication.
If one of the reviewers provides a positive conclusion and the second provides a negative one, the article is sent by the editor to a third reviewer who is an expert on the subject of the article and has no conflict of interest.
If a third reviewer or member of the editorial board provides a positive opinion, the article is recommended for publication.
The editorial board does not enter into discussions with authors regarding the decisions it makes.
