Reviewing Process

Details

 

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 editors 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 editors 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 editors assign at least 2 reviewers. 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.

Reviewer should agree or decline an invitation to review a manuscript within five working days.

If agreed, the manuscript along with review form is forwarded to the reviewers. Reviewers should review the manuscript, fill in the review form and send it to the editors.

The journal uses a closed double-blind peer review system (the identities of the authors and reviewers are kept hidden). Submitted manuscripts are reviewed by 2 experts.

The reviewers are selected due to their scholarly expertise. Reviewers invited by the editors of the journal should reveal any potential conflict of interest they may have with respect to the manuscript or the authors. Otherwise, reviewers should decline an invitation to review a manuscript.

The reviewers are encouraged to complete review (fill in the review form and send it to the editors) 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 authors, 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 editors forward the review to the author, along with a suggestion to consider recommendations (notes) of the reviewers. The revised manuscript is expected to be resubmitted by the authors within 30 days (22 working days), highlighting all the corrections made by the authors. The revised manuscript is forwarded to the reviewers. The reviewers 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 authors of the manuscript submit a comprehensive response on the reviewer’s notes to the editors. Editors consider author’s response on the reviewer’s notes. It may lead to assigning new reviewers for the manuscript. Otherwise authors are encouraged by the editors 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 editors.

If a reviewer recommends a manuscript to be rejected, editors thoroughly check out the reviewer’s notes that may lead either to assigning new reviewers for the manuscript or the manuscript to be rejected.

Once the editors have made a decision to accept a manuscript for publication, the editors inform 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.