Peer reviewing guidelines
All articles submitted to the journal pass obligatory anonymous ("blind") reviewing. Reviewing of articles is carried out by the members of an editorial board of the journal; invited reviewers are well-known experts in the subject of peer-reviewing. Reviewers are selected by the editors of the journal. The review period is 2-3 weeks After reviewing process of the article, the reviewer makes the following recommendations:
- the article is recommended for publication in the present form;
- the article is recommended for publication after correcting shortcomings noted by the reviewer;
- the article requires revision and re-review;
- article needs additional reviewing by another expert;
- the article cannot be published in the Journal.
If the review contains a recommendation for publication of the article after the correction noted by the reviewer, the editorial Board sends a review with a proposal to consider a new version of article or arguments (partially or completely) to disprove them to the author
Authors should send the corrected article not later than 2 weeks. If the authors do not return the revised version of the article within the deadline, the editorial Board doesn’t include the article into the new issue of the periodical journal. If author refuse to correct the article which was noted by the reviewer, the author notifies in the written form the editor of his decision not to publish the article.
If the author and the reviewers have insoluble contradictions about the article, the editorial Board has the right to submit the article for further reviewing. In conflict situations the decision is taken by the senior editor at the editorial Board meeting.
Updating date: 27.09.17