Reviewing Process
- Details
- Category: English
In order to ensure the high quality of the papers, a peer-review system is used to assess the quality of a manuscript submitted to the journal.
The editor(s) assess whether a manuscript matches to the journal’s scope. If a manuscript does not match to the journal’s scope, the corresponding author is informed that submitted manuscript is declined within five working days.
The editor(s) assess whether a manuscript matches to the formatting template. If a manuscript does not match to the formatting template, corresponding author is encouraged to format a manuscript thoroughly prior to reviewing a manuscript.
The editor(s) assign the reviewer(s). The reviewing process involves independent researchers in the relevant research area who assess submitted manuscripts for originality, validity and significance to help editors determine whether a manuscript should be published.
A manuscript along with review form is forwarded to the reviewer(s). Reviewer(s) should review the manuscript, fill in the review form and send it to the editor(s).
The journal uses a closed double-blind peer review system (the identities of the author(s) and reviewer(s) are kept hidden). Submitted manuscripts are reviewed by one or more experts.
The reviewer(s) are selected due to their scholarly expertise. Reviewers invited by the editor(s) of the journal should reveal any potential conflict of interest they may have with respect to the manuscript or the author(s). Otherwise, reviewer(s) should decline an invitation to review a manuscript.
The reviewer(s) are encouraged to complete review (fill in the review form and send it to the editor(s)) within 21 days (15 working days).
Reviewers are encouraged to recommend whether a manuscript should be accepted, revised (minor revision or major revision) or rejected, including reviewer’s notes over originality and relevance of presented work, experimental or/and theoretical approach to the discussed problem, strengths and weaknesses of the methods used by author(s), reliability of the results and validity of the conclusions, organization of the manuscript, Discussion of the most relevant literature on the topic, etc.)
If the review includes recommendation for revision of the manuscript, the editor(s) forwards the review to the author, along with a suggestion to consider recommendations (notes) of the reviewer(s). The revised manuscript is expected to be resubmitted by the author(s) within 30 days (22 working days), highlighting all the corrections made by the author(s). The revised manuscript is forwarded to the reviewer(s). The reviewer(s) thoroughly check out the revised manuscript and recommend whether a manuscript should be accepted, revised once again (minor revision or major revision) or rejected, including reviewer’s notes.
In case of dissent with the reviewer’s notes, the author(s) of the manuscript submit a comprehensive response on the reviewer’s notes to the editor(s). Editor(s) consider author’s response on the reviewer’s notes. It may lead to assigning new reviewer(s) for the manuscript. Otherwise author(s) are encouraged by the editor(s) to revise a manuscript in accordance with reviewer’s notes.
Either author’s repeated dissent with the reviewer’s notes or author’s inability (unwillingness) to take reviewer’s notes into consideration may lead a manuscript to be rejected by the editor(s).
If a reviewer recommends a manuscript to be rejected, editor(s) thoroughly check out the reviewer’s notes that may lead either to assigning new reviewer(s) for the manuscript or the manuscript to be rejected.
Once the editor(s) have made a decision to accept a manuscript for publication, the editor(s) informs the corresponding author and specifies further publication deadlines.
The order priority for the manuscript’s publication is determined by the date of its submission.
Complete reviews (the review form filled in by the reviewer) are being kept for 2 years.