Reviewing of manuscripts

  1. All materials should have open access. The presence of a restricted access label serves as a basis for rejecting the manuscript from publication.
  2. Received manuscripts are registered by the editor in chief in the journal of registration of articles with the date of receipt, title, full name of the author(s), place of work of the author(s).
  3. The executive editor organizes the review of the articles submitted by the authors for publication. For each manuscript submitted to the editorial office, at least one review is made.
  4. All reviewers must be qualified specialists in the subject of the reviewed materials and have had publications on the subject of the reviewed article within the last 3 years. The reviews are temporarily being stored in the archive of the editorial office of the publication for 5 years.
  5. The reviewer must review the submitted article within the deadline set by the editor of the referral and send a review or a reasoned refusal to review it.
  6. The reviewer can recommend the article for publication; recommend it for publication after the revision, taking into account the comments; do not recommend the article for publication. If the reviewer recommends the article for publication after the revision, taking into account the comments, or does not recommend the article for publication – the review should indicate the reasoned reasons for such a decision.
  7. When reviewing articles, the relevance of the scientific problem solved by the author is monitored. The review evaluates the theoretical or applied significance of the research, correlates the author's conclusions with existing scientific concepts. A necessary element of the review is the reviewer's assessment of the personal contribution of the author of the article to the solution of the problem under consideration. The text of the review notes the correspondence of the style, logic and accessibility of the presentation to the scientific nature of the material, and also concludes on the reliability and validity of the conclusions.
  8. The executive editor and the editor in chief jointly review the articles and reviews received from the authors and make a decision on their publication or refusal to publish. If there are disputable situations, the issue is submitted for discussion to the editorial board.
  9. Based on the reviewer’s decision, a letter (by e-mail) is sent to the author(s) on behalf of the responsible editor. The letter contains copies of reviews or a reasoned refusal to publish the materials submitted to the journal.
  10. Upon receipt of a corresponding request from the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation to the editorial office of the publication, the responsible editor or a person acting on behalf of the responsible editor must send to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation copies of reviews that are in temporary storage – no more than 5 years – in the archive of the editorial office of the publication.
  11. The article sent by the author to the editorial board after the elimination of comments is considered in the general order. In the registration journal, a note is made about the date of receipt of the new version of the article.