Reviewing
Peer Review Policy
- Peer Review Model
The journal employs a double-blind peer review model, whereby authors remain anonymous to reviewers and reviewers remain anonymous to authors.
To ensure the integrity of the double-blind review process, the editorial office removes or redacts all author-identifying information, including names, affiliations, contact details, acknowledgements, and file metadata, before forwarding manuscripts to reviewers. Authors are required to submit manuscripts in a format that does not contain information enabling their direct identification, except where such information is essential to the content of the research.
- Editorial Evaluation Stages and Estimated Timelines
Initial Editorial Screening (1–5 Working Days)
Upon submission, manuscripts undergo an initial editorial assessment to determine their compliance with the journal’s aims and scope, formatting requirements, and basic submission standards.
Plagiarism check
All submitted manuscripts are screened for plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct in accordance with the journal’s «Procedure for Handling Complaints Concerning Breaches of Academic Integrity & Publication Ethics» and established editorial procedures.
Double-Blind Peer Review (7–21 Working Days)
Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial screening are submitted to at least two independent external reviewers possessing expertise relevant to the subject matter of the submission.
Review timelines may be extended when necessary, including but not limited to cases requiring highly specialized reviewers or additional rounds of review following manuscript revisions.
- Reviewer Selection and Conflict of Interest Prevention
Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, academic qualifications, and research experience relevant to the manuscript under consideration. A reviewer must not be an author or co-author of the submitted manuscript, the academic supervisor of the author (where applicable), or an individual employed within the same department, institution, or organizational unit as the author. Reviewers are required to disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest and must decline participation in the review process whenever such conflicts may affect their objectivity.
- Evaluation Criteria
The final publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Editorial Board, based on the following criteria:
- Results of the double-blind peer review process;
- Scientific originality, novelty, and significance;
- Relevance and timeliness of the research topic;
- Quality of the manuscript, including methodology, argumentation, structure, and academic writing;
- Compliance with the principles of academic integrity and publication ethics.
Particular attention is paid to detecting plagiarism, duplicate publication, defamatory content, data fabrication, data falsification, citation manipulation, and other forms of research misconduct.
- Editorial Decisions
Based on the reviewers’ recommendations and editorial assessment, one of the following decisions may be made:
- Аccept for publication;
- Accept subject to minor or major revisions;
- Resubmit for further review following substantial revisions;
- Reject.
If both reviewers recommend rejection, the manuscript will be rejected.
If reviewer recommendations differ substantially, the manuscript may be referred to a third independent reviewer. The final decision will then be made considering all review reports and editorial assessment.
6. Revision and Re-review
When revisions are requested, authors are encouraged to address all reviewer and editorial comments and submit a revised version of the manuscript within the timeframe specified by the editorial office. Where necessary, the revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or assigned to additional reviewers for further evaluation.
- Confidentiality
All submitted manuscripts, supplementary materials, correspondence, and review reports are treated as strictly confidential. Reviewers must not disclose, distribute, retain, reproduce, or use unpublished materials or information obtained through the peer review process for personal, professional, or financial benefit.
- Final Provisions
The final decision regarding the publication of any manuscript rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board of the journal. Submitted manuscripts and accompanying materials are not returned to authors.
