The decision on publication is made by the editorial board of the journal on the basis of reviews containing expert assessments of the reviewers, taking into account the compliance of the submitted materials with the requirements of the journal, the thematic focus of scientific significance and the relevance of the materials received by the editors.
The journal uses double-blind peer review (the reviewer does not know who the author of the article is, the author of the article does not know who the reviewer is). This review is carried out by third-party specialists from the database of expert specialists (reviewers) of the publishing house, on behalf of the editors. Members of the journal’s editorial board may also be involved in reviewing.
Reviewing of articles is carried out by members of the editorial board and editorial board, as well as by invited reviewers – leading specialists from Russia and other countries. The decision to select a particular reviewer to review an article is made by the editor-in-chief. The review period is 1-2 weeks (depending on the busyness of the reviewer and the complexity of the material being reviewed), but at the request of the reviewer it can be extended.
Each article is sent to a reviewer, a specialist in a particular field of research.
Each reviewer has the right to refuse a review if there is a clear conflict of interest that affects the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials. Based on the results of consideration of the manuscript, the reviewer makes recommendations on the further fate of the article (each decision of the reviewer is justified):
- the article is recommended for publication in its present form;
- the article is recommended for publication after correction of the shortcomings noted by the reviewer;
- the article needs additional review by another specialist;
- the article cannot be published in the journal.
The editors send comments to the author with a proposal to take into account the recommendations when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them with reason. The article revised by the author is re-submitted for review. In case of a positive conclusion from the reviewer, the article is queued for publication.
The reviewer cannot be the author (co-author) of the article being reviewed.
If the author and reviewers have irresolvable contradictions regarding the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief at a meeting of the editorial board.
Articles received by the journal’s editors are checked using the Anti-Plagiarism system. If the result of the check reveals incorrectly executed borrowings, the article may be rejected (up to 30% of borrowings).
An article not recommended for publication by the decision of the editorial board will not be accepted for re-consideration. A notice of refusal to publish is sent to the author by email.
After the editorial board of the journal makes a decision to accept the article for publication, the editors inform the author about this and indicate the publication time frame.
The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient basis for publishing an article. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.