The scientific journal applies a double-anonymized peer review procedure, under which the authors do not know the identities of the reviewers, while the reviewers have no information about the authors of the manuscript or their affiliations.
The procedure consists of two stages: initial editorial screening and scientific peer review.
1. Initial Editorial Screening (up to 5 working days)
The Editorial Office conducts a preliminary assessment of the manuscript, during which the following aspects are checked:
- compliance with the subject area and scope of the journal;
- compliance with the formatting requirements (manuscript preparation guidelines);
- availability of all required documents (manuscript submission requirements);
- compliance with the principles of academic integrity (text originality, use of AI, declaration of conflicts of interest, etc.).
The manuscript is checked for textual similarities using the Turnitin service.
If the manuscript does not meet the requirements, it may be returned to the author for revision or rejected without scientific peer review (desk rejection).
2. Scientific Peer Review
Before the manuscript is submitted for scientific peer review, the Editorial Office checks that the manuscript contains no information that could identify the author(s). All information about the authors and their affiliations is removed from the manuscript.
The approximate time for assigning reviewers after completion of the initial editorial screening is 1–3 working days.
Using the Open Journal Systems (OJS), the manuscript is sent to at least two independent reviewers who are specialists in the relevant scientific field, in accordance with the declared specialties, and who have no conflict of interest with the authors.
If a conflict of interest is identified, the reviewer declines the review, and the Editorial Office appoints another reviewer.
Each reviewer receives a request through the OJS system to:
- confirm their willingness to review the manuscript;
- accept the specified deadline for preparing and submitting the review.
The review period is up to 15–20 calendar days from the date the reviewer accepts the invitation to review the manuscript.
Review Criteria
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript according to the following 10 criteria:
- relevance of the research topic;
- presence of new scientific approaches or results;
- contribution of the research to the development of the relevant specialty;
- soundness of the research methodology and methods;
- soundness of the analysis/evaluation and the corresponding conclusions;
- logical structure and quality of presentation;
- quality of scientific argumentation;
- correctness of the analysis and interpretation of the results;
- quality of the academic style of presentation;
- compliance with the relevant scientific field and the requirements of the journal.
The reviewer:
- assigns a score for each criterion from 0 (full non-compliance with the criterion) to 5 (full compliance with the criterion); and
- provides a written assessment of the scientific value of the article, identifies comments that can be addressed, and makes one of the following recommendations:
- accept the article for publication;
- accept the article after revision;
- reject the article.
If the scores and overall conclusions of the two reviewers differ substantially, the Editorial Office may appoint a third reviewer.
The authors automatically receive access to the scores assigned for each criterion and the reviewers’ conclusions regarding the scientific value of the article and comments that can be addressed.
The Editorial Office automatically receives access to the scores assigned for each criterion, the reviewers’ conclusions regarding the scientific value of the article and comments that can be addressed, and their recommendations regarding acceptance for publication.
Based on the independent conclusions of the reviewers, the Editorial Office sends the authors one of the following decisions:
- acceptance of the manuscript for publication;
- acceptance of the manuscript for publication after revision and addressing the reviewers’ comments;
- rejection of the manuscript.
In the case of a decision to accept the manuscript after revision, the authors are given up to 10 calendar days to revise the manuscript and address the reviewers’ comments. If necessary, the revised manuscript may be resubmitted for peer review. The period for the subsequent review is up to 14 calendar days.
Final Decision
The final decision on the publication of an article is made by the Editorial Board based on the reviewers’ conclusions and the results of the manuscript revision.
The above timeframes are approximate and may be extended if it is necessary to replace a reviewer, if there is a delay in receiving a response from the reviewers, or if additional peer review is required.
All materials submitted for peer review are treated as confidential.