Procedure for reviewing
The journal only publishes the manuscripts recommended by the reviewers.
A type of reviewing is double blind (anonymous).
The reviewer is appointed by the Editor-in-Chief or the Deputy-Chief editor.
Both the members of the Editorial Board and highly qualified scientists and specialists from other organizations and enterprises can be invited for reviewing manuscripts. Reviewers can be Doctor of Sciences or Candidate of Sciences, having the specialization that is closest to the field of knowledge touched upon in the paper.
The reviewer is not allowed to copy the manuscript and to pass the manuscript to another person for a peer review. Reviewing is performed confidentially. Violation of confidentiality is impossible unless the reviewer declares unreliability or counterfeiting of the article's materials.
The deadline for the submission of the review on the paper, as a rule, can not exceed three weeks from the date of dispatch of the paper to the reviewer.
The review should reveal topicality of the submitted material, the degree of academic novelty of the research, define compliance of the text submitted for publication to the general profile of the journal and the scientific style of material presentation (style, literacy, linguistic culture, etc.).
The reviewer provides a conclusion on possibility of the article publication: "Recommended", "Recommended after correction of the errors, indicated by the reviewer", or "Not recommended".
In case the article was rejected, the Editorial sends reasonable refusal to the author and returns the paper for rework.
If an article has undergone substantial processing by the author on the recommendation of the reviewer, it is sent for re-review. The editors reserve the right to reject the manuscripts in case the author is unable or unwilling to address the Editorial Board's suggestions properly.
If negative reviews are received from two or more reviewers or if there is one negative review on the revised version of the article, the article will be rejected without further reviewing by other members of the Editorial Board. The decision on the appropriateness of publishing after the review is made by the Editor-in-Chief, and, if necessary, by the Editorial Board.
The reviewer's name may be reported to the author provided that the former gives consent to it.
All original reviews are kept at the editor’s office for five years.