Peer-review Process

  1. All the manuscripts submitted to the journal are subject to independent peer-review process. It is aimed at the most objective evaluation of the manuscript content. This implies a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the manuscript reviewed in order to enhance its academic quality by all the possible means (by updating, revision by the author, additional review, professional and literary editing, etc.).
  2. Peer-review is carried out by the members of the Editorial board as well as by the independent experts according to the field of research. The Deputy Editor-in-Chief – Executive Secretary of the journal invites two reviewers for each manuscript submitted.
  3. Double-blind peer review model is employed by the journal (both the reviewer and the author are anonymous) except for the cases when a special consultation of the other expert in the relevant field is required.
  4. The reviewer analyses the manuscript, evaluates its theoretical and methodological level as well as its scientific significance and practical value. Based on all the above-mentioned the reviewer concludes about the academic level of the paper and recommends that it be accepted, revised or rejected.
  5. Reviewers may submit their reviews in any form they choose. If necessary, the reviewer may use the review form. If the reviewer does not use the review form, he or she is asked to include his or her recommendation on the manuscript in the text of his or her review: to publish without change; should be revised and re-reviewed after the revision; to reject. If the reviewer recommends rejecting the manuscript, he or she is asked to give reasons for such decision. The reviewer signs his or her review and submits it to the editorial office in electronic form.
  6. The reviewer’s decision is sent to the author by email. The author, if necessary, revises the manuscript within the time required and submits the revised version of the manuscript to the editorial office.
  7. If necessary, the revised variant of the manuscript is sent to the reviewer who decides whether it may be published.
  8. The manuscripts of the editorial board members are also subject to the independent peer-review process. The editorial board members may not review their manuscripts.
  9. If the author of the paper doesn’t agree with the reviewer’s decision, he or she may send a reasoned response to the review to the editorial office of the journal. In that case, the paper is considered at the editorial board meeting and/or is sent to the other expert for additional review. The editorial board may reject the paper if the author has not revised it according to the reviewer’s recommendations and comments. There will be no other correspondence between the editorial office and authors.