Peer review process
Procedure for Reviewing Manuscripts
The review of manuscripts is carried out to ensure the high scientific-theoretical level of the journal and to select the most valuable and relevant scientific papers. The purpose of peer review is to facilitate the careful selection of authors’ manuscripts for publication, provide an objective assessment of the quality of the submitted material and determine the extent to which it complies with scientific, literary and ethical standards. All reviewers must remain objective and adhere to the principles of publication ethics.
1. General Provisions
1.1. All manuscripts submitted to the journal are subject to mandatory screening for textual borrowings using specialized software tools, in particular StrikePlagiarism.com or similar systems.
1.2. The plagiarism check is carried out within 7 days from the date the manuscript is received by the editorial office.
1.3. Only manuscripts that meet the established formatting requirements, correspond to the thematic scope of the journal, and demonstrate an originality level of at least 70% according to the results of the plagiarism check are admitted for further consideration and peer review. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements are returned to the authors for revision or rejected without further consideration.
1.4. The journal applies a double-blind peer review procedure, which ensures mutual anonymity of authors and reviewers.
1.5. Manuscripts with a textual originality level of less than 70% are returned to the authors for revision or may be rejected without further consideration.
2. Selection of Reviewers
2.1. Each manuscript is sent to two independent reviewers who have the appropriate academic qualifications and research experience in the subject area of the submitted work.
2.2. The main criteria for selecting reviewers are:
- relevant academic qualifications;
- experience in scientific research in the relevant field;
- publications related to the subject of the manuscript;
- absence of any conflict of interest regarding the authors or the research content.
2.3. In the case of a conflict of interest, the reviewer is obliged to inform the editorial office and decline to conduct the review.
3. Peer Review Process
3.1. After completion of the plagiarism check, the manuscript is submitted for peer review.
3.2. The peer review period generally takes up to 2 weeks from the date the manuscript is sent to the reviewers.
3.3. During the peer review process, the following are evaluated:
- compliance with the journal’s thematic scope;
- scientific novelty of the results;
- validity of the methods applied;
- reliability of the obtained results;
- logical presentation of the material;
- practical or theoretical significance of the research;
- compliance of the formatting with the journal’s requirements.
4. Documentation of Peer Review Results
4.1. The results of the peer review are documented in a written form of a review of the established template.
4.2. The review includes comments, recommendations for revision and a conclusion regarding the possibility of publishing the material.
4.3. Reviews are certified in accordance with the procedure established by the institution where the reviewer is employed. The review must be signed by the reviewer, indicating their position, academic degree and academic title.
4.4. Reviews are kept in the editorial office of the journal for up to one year from the date of the final decision on the manuscript.
5. Making the Editorial Decision
The Editor-in-Chief analyzes the reviewers’ reports and makes the final decision regarding publication on their basis, taking into account all recommendations, arguments, and compliance with the journal’s requirements. The Editor-in-Chief does not participate in decision-making regarding her own articles, her family members’ or colleagues’ articles, as well as materials related to products or services in which she has a personal interest. All such articles undergo independent peer review without the participation of the Editor-in-Chief or her research group. The final decision on these articles is made by the Deputy Editor-in-Chief.
5.1. Based on the received reviews, the editorial board makes one of the following decisions:
- accept the manuscript for publication;
- accept the manuscript for publication after revision;
- send the manuscript for re-review;
- reject the manuscript.
5.2. The decision of the editorial board is communicated to the authors. Articles requiring revision are sent together with the review text without identifying the reviewers. The revised version of the article is submitted for repeated review, during which reviewers may request additional corrections. Revisions do not guarantee acceptance of the article, and if the reviewers consider the changes unsatisfactory, the article will be rejected.
5.3. The Editor-in-Chief analyzes the reviewers’ reports and makes the final decision regarding publication on their basis, taking into account all recommendations, arguments and compliance with the journal’s requirements.
5.4. The Editor-in-Chief does not participate in decision-making regarding her articles, her family members’ or colleagues’ articles, as well as materials related to products or services in which she has a personal interest. All such articles undergo independent peer review without the participation of the Editor-in-Chief or their research group. The final decision on these articles is made by the Deputy Editor-in-Chief.
6. Procedure for Forming an Issue
6.1. The journal is published four times a year.
6.2. After the completion of peer review and editorial processing of the materials, the next issue of the journal is compiled.
6.3. The prepared issue of the journal is subject to approval by the Academic Council of the publishing institution.
7. Confidentiality and Ethical Requirements
7.1. All materials submitted to the editorial office are treated as confidential.
7.2. Reviewers are not entitled to use the information obtained for their own scientific purposes until the official publication of the article.
7.3. The editorial office ensures compliance with the principles of confidentiality and academic integrity at all stages of the editorial process.
