Review Process

1. General provisions

1.1. All manuscripts that pass the initial screening are peer reviewed. Peer review aims to assess objectively the scholarly value, originality and fit of the article with the journal’s scope and requirements, and to help authors improve their work.

1.2. The journal uses double-blind peer review: neither the authors nor the reviewers know each other’s identities. All communication between them goes through the editorial office in OJS.

1.3. Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers who are experts in the field (as a rule, holders of a doctoral or PhD degree) and have no conflict of interest with the authors. Reviewers are appointed by the Editor-in-Chief or, on his behalf, by a member of the editorial board.

1.4. Peer review is confidential. The editors do not disclose any information about a manuscript (its receipt, content, status, reviewers’ comments or decision) to anyone other than the authors and reviewers.

1.5. Before review, all manuscripts are checked for text similarity (see Countering Plagiarism).

2. Timeline

• initial screening by the editors — up to 7 days;
• reviewer’s response to the invitation — 3–5 days;
• peer review — 14 days; if necessary, this may be extended, but to no more than one month;
• revision by the author — up to 30 days;
• re-review of the revised manuscript — up to 14 days.

The time from submission to final decision is usually 6–10 weeks. The date of acceptance is the date on which the editors make the final decision to accept.

3. Decisions

3.1. The reviewer completes the review form and recommends one of the following: “accept”, “accept with minor revisions”, “revise and resubmit for review” or “reject”.

3.2. The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief (or, on his behalf, by a member of the editorial board) on the basis of the reviews. If the reviews conflict, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer.

3.3. The decision, together with the anonymised reviews, is sent to the author by email via OJS.

3.4. Manuscripts by editorial board members are reviewed on the same terms; the board member concerned takes no part in the decision on his or her own manuscript.

The step-by-step handling of manuscripts is described on the Review of Submissions page.