Manuscript Review Procedure RU
All scientific articles submitted to the journal are subject to mandatory review before publication. The editor-in-chief, his deputies, issuing and scientific editors determine the conformity of the submitted scientific article with the journal profile, the requirements for its design, analyze the originality and, subject to the stated requirements, send it for review to a specialist formed on the basis of the Institute of Expert Council – a doctor or candidate of sciences who has the closest to the topic of a scientific article specialization.
Reviewers are informed that the manuscripts sent to them for examination are subject to copyright, copies of unpublished materials are not made, and the content of the articles is not subject to disclosure.
The editors reserve the right to reject the following materials:
- articles that do not meet the profile of the journal or are issued in violation of the rules;
- articles published in the same volume and with the same name in other scientific publications, in any media, including the Internet;
- articles containing borrowed text (plagiarism).
Authors without a scientific degree, graduate students, applicants, trainees provide an opinion or a certified review of their supervisor (another consultant with a scientific degree).
Upon request, any review filed by the publisher is provided to the Higher Attestation Commission and / or to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation.
Review periods may not exceed eight weeks. The review should indicate:
- whether the content of the article matches its title;
- whether a scientific article meets modern achievements in the field of science under consideration (taking into account its relevance and scientific novelty), as well as a reasoned conclusion about the possibility of publishing a scientific article in a peer-reviewed publication. The reviewer gives recommendations for revision, recommends a rubric.
Within 10 days, the authors of the rejected articles are sent a reasoned refusal without indicating the name of the reviewer. The editors do not enter into further correspondence with these authors on the reasons and grounds for rejecting a scientific article.
An article in need of improvement is sent to the authors with the comments of the reviewer or a member of the editorial board. Authors should take into account all the comments made in the process of reviewing and editing the article, respond to each of the comments and indicate the place in the text where the changes were made. Changes made by the author must be made to the electronic version of the text and returned to the editorial office within the specified time. After revision, the article is re-reviewed, and the editorial board decides on the possibility of publication.
Reception, consideration, approval of scientific articles and the results of reviews are noted in the book of movement of articles.
The final decision to publish an article is made by the editor-in-chief, and if necessary by the editorial board. Reviews of the received materials are stored in the archives of the founder of the journal for 5 (five) years.