-
PEER REVIEW POLICY
Dear authors, before submitting manuscripts, please click "Submission" and make sure that the article is ready.The peer review system is an important step in peer review of articles published in academic journals, improving the effectiveness of research, achieving effective results, assessing quality and validity, and preventing plagiarism.
The editor-in-chief must ensure that reviews are considered effectively, fairly and in a timely manner. The review system has been relevant since the inception of scientific journals, and has always been followed by scientific publications aimed at development.
Received articles are initially evaluated by the editors for compliance with the ethical principles and publishing policy of the editors, as well as the rules of submissions. Articles that do not pass the initial evaluation are returned without being sent for review.
Articles that are not formalized with an anti-plagiarism document or, in suspicious cases, that have not passed their own anti-plagiarism program of the editors, are returned without being sent for comment. Articles submitted to the editorial office are subject to plagiarism. The authenticity index must be at least 75%.
An article that has passed the initial evaluation is sent to two reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. If one of the opinions is negative, the article is sent to the third reviewer or the final decision on publication is made by the members of the editorial board.Deadline for consideration of submitted articles:
Preliminary editorial evaluation - 2-3 weeks
Reviewer's evaluation - 3- 6 weeks ** In case of a delay in the opinion of reviewers, this period may be extended due to the appointment of a new reviewer.
Open peer Review Policy of the Journal
Open review policy is a generalized form of a number of models aimed at increasing the transparency of the conclusion process and after the examination. A common feature of open peer review is that the author and reviewer get to know each other during the evaluation process. Let's get acquainted with other types of open examination:
- - Mentioning the names of reviewers on the article page;
- - Publication of a review anonymously or by name along with the article;
- - Publication of the response of the author and editor, along with the article, indicating the name of the reviewer.
What are the interests of the reviewers?
Commenting on articles is a process that takes time and effort. This process takes days, weeks, and in most cases there is basically no financial incentive. But why are experts interested in collaborating with a journal as a reviewer? You can approach it in several directions:
First, the reviewers want to help the editors and are interested in the development of the journal.
Second, by reading articles, reviewers also learn about innovations in their fields, research work, and meet new researchers. The new research they come across can also help reviewers stimulate their research and generate new ideas and opinions.
Thirdly, a reviewer who systematically cooperates with the journal and is loyal to it can later act as an editor. Working as a reviewer is also beneficial in terms of career advancement. Since it is noted in the personal file of a specialist, this forms a positive opinion of the employer about him.
Main criteria by Reviewers:
♦ Originality - new in the subject area, methods or research results
♦ Relevance to existing knowledge and its expansion
♦ Scientific methodology – reliability and objectivity of conclusions
♦ Clarity of presentation, structured material and quality of writing
♦ Solid, logical reasoning
♦ Theoretical and practical significance
♦ Novelty and relevance of links
♦ International/Global Approach
♦ Strict adherence to the editorial framework and tasks of the journal
♦ A good title, accurate keywords and a well-written abstract.Articles are reviewed by doctors or candidates of science appointed by the editorial board. Members of the editorial board and board, as well as leading experts, are involved in commenting on articles. In the case of a negative review of the article, the editors inform the author about it. After re-editing by the authors, the article is returned to the reviewers, after which, based on the final opinion of the reviewer, the editorial board approves or rejects the article for publication. The editors have the right to edit the text.
The text of the article should be submitted to the editorial office in Word for Windows format and in electronic form in Times New Roman font in order to eliminate the shortcomings that may arise during the recompilation of the text.
Authors are not charged for the publication of a manuscript.
OVERVIEW CONTINUED
The practice of reviewing articles guarantees the reliable publication of scientific publications. This is a necessary process carried out by all reputable scientific journals for the selection of scientific publications. The reviewers of the Review Review Sequence play an important role in maintaining high standards. All manuscripts are reviewed in accordance with the following procedure:
- Preliminary evaluation of the manuscript.
First, the editor-in-chief evaluates all manuscripts. At this stage, it is rarely possible to accept some manuscripts without an expert opinion. If the manuscript is:
- - not original enough,
- - has serious scientific flaws,
- - grammatical and stylistic errors,
- - or goes beyond the purpose and intent of the journal, it is sent to the authors for revision, indicating the editor's comments. Manuscripts that meet the minimum criteria are sent to at least two external reviewers for review.
Type of expert assessment:
The review sequence uses a double "confidential" review where both reviewer and author remain anonymous throughout the process.
How a reviewer is chosen
Reviewers are selected for the article according to their specialization and experience. The database of reviewers is constantly updated by Journal.
- Evaluation of Reviewer
The reviewer must evaluate whether the manuscript is:
- - originality;
- - methodology;
- - actuality;
- - correct structure due to the topic of paper (about the research in Introduction; Discussion, results in Conclusion; using of new and original references, also using from the articles have been published in the last three years)
Correction of grammatical errors is not part of the peer review process, but may suggest corrections to the manuscript at the request of the reviewers. Expert review form: Click on this post to download form-from-reviewer.pdf
How long does the verification process take?
The time required for verification depends on the reaction of the reviewers. If the results of two or more reviewers are contradictory or the review process is delayed, an additional expert opinion will be required. If the reviewer's report editor is completely satisfied, the decision to "accept", "reject", or "revise" the article will be based on the opinion of only one reviewer. The opinion will be sent to the author with recommendations from reviewers and editorial comments. Manuscripts edited by the authors are sent to the original reviewers for reconsideration.
Final editorial decision
The reviewers inform the editor, who made the final decision, in writing about the "acceptance" or "rejection" of the article. The final decision is sent to the author along with the recommendations of the reviewers.
What you need to do to become a reviewer
If you want to become a reviewer, please contact the editor. Reviewer Benefits: This allows you to read and evaluate the latest work in your field at an early stage, and contribute to the overall integrity of research and published articles. You can also refer to articles in our journal as part of your professional development requirements for various professional societies and organizations.
The text of the article should be submitted to the editorial office in Word for Windows format and in electronic form in Times New Roman font in order to eliminate the shortcomings that may arise during the recompilation of the text.
Authors are charged for the publication of a manuscript.
