Process of Review

I. General conditions

1.1. The received publications pass review process according to the journal editorial board. The purpose of the review is to facilitate the strict selection of author's manuscripts for publication and to make specific recommendations for their improvement. The review procedure is focused on the most objective assessment of the content of the scientific article and its compliance with the requirements of the journal. Reviewers execute a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the materials of the article.

1.2.The review is conducted confidentially on the principle of double-blind peer-review – when neither the authors nor the reviewer do not know each other. Interaction between the author and the reviewer is possible if it will improve the style and logic of the presentation of the research material.

1.3. Only those articles which are valuable from scientific points and contribute to the solution of actual problems and tasks are accepted for publication. We separately assess the level of compliance with the rules for preparing the article for publication (see Requirements for the execution of articles).

1.4. The main purpose of the review procedure is to eliminate instances of poorly-practiced scientific research and to balance the interests of authors, readers, editorial board, reviewers, and the institution in which the research was conducted. The number and type of manuscripts submitted for review, as well as the number of reviewers, the review procedure itself and the comments of the reviewers may vary.

1.5. Review of manuscripts is confidential. The author trusts editors the results of his scientific work. Disclosure of confidential parts of the review of the manuscript violates the author's rights.

1.6. Editors do not report information about the manuscript (including information about its receipt, the period of review, review process, critical remarks of reviewers, and the final decision) to anyone other than publisher and reviewers themselves. Violation of confidentiality is possible in the case of a statement of unreliability or falsification of materials. In all other cases, its preservation is mandatory.

1.7. All manuscripts are subject to mandatory verification of the uniqueness of the author's text with the help of appropriate software.

II. Review procedure

2.1. All manuscripts submitted to the editorial board are sent to the two reviewers on the research profile. Chief Editor of the journal assigns reviewers. By the decision of the editor-in-chief of the journal (under certain circumstances) the appointment of reviewers may be entrusted to a member of the editorial board. In some cases, the issue of the choice of reviewers is decided at a meeting of the editorial board.

2.2. The peer review of the submitted material takes place within 14 days. The review period may vary with certain conditions for the most objective evaluation of the quality of the materials provided, but will not exceed one calendar month.

2.3. The conclusion of reviewers is the main tool for making a decision on publication, refinement or refusal. Only after the decision about printing of the article it is passed to the publisher on the e-mail address (SMS message, etc.).