Peer Review

After submitting the article, the editors of the journal check the article for compliance with the subject matter and requirements of the journal. After that, the article is sent to the reviewers. 

Reviewers are appointed from among specialists competent in the research topic, provided that there are no potential conflicts of interest. Such a specialist must be registered on the journal website and give consent (confirm the request) to review in his/her account. The review is completed exclusively online by filling out the review form in the reviewer's account, which contains the following fields:

- Title of the article.

- Date of receipt of the article for review.

- Date of submission of the review to the editorial office.

- Does the content of the article correspond to the thematic areas of the journal?

- Is the topic of the article relevant?

- Does the title of the article correspond to its content?

- Does the structure of the article meet the requirements?

- Are the technical requirements for the design of the article met?

- Has the analysis of the results of previous scientific research on this issue been sufficiently carried out?

- Are the results of the conducted research new?

- Do the results of the conducted research have theoretical and/or practical significance?

- Has the scientific results been sufficiently substantiated?

- Has the research goal been achieved and the tasks set been solved?

- Comments and recommendations for improvement (if necessary).

- Conclusion. 

Requirements for the review:

- The review must be objective, well-reasoned and correct.

- Disclosure of the personal data of the author or reviewer is not allowed.

- All fields of the form must be filled in completely.

- Comments and recommendations must be clear and constructive.

- The conclusion must state one of the following decisions:

• recommend for publication;

• recommend after revision;

• do not recommend for publication.

-The review must be submitted within the deadline set by the editorial office (up to 4 weeks). If meeting deadlines is impossible, the editorial office should be notified in advance.

If the reviewer recommends revisions to the submitted manuscript, the article is returned to the author with a request to take the comments into account when preparing a revised version or to provide well-reasoned explanations for rejecting them. The revised manuscript is then resubmitted to the reviewer for further peer review.

The decision to accept or reject an article is based on the conclusions of reviewers. If a manuscript is rejected, the editorial board informs the author by email of the reasons for the rejection. If the article is accepted for publication, the editorial board notifies the author of the positive decision. The review procedure is anonymous for both reviewers and authors (double-blind review).

All materials submitted to the editorial board are treated confidentially.