PEER REVIEW POLICY

 

The journal’s peer review policy has been developed in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and international standards of scholarly peer review.

The purpose of peer review is to ensure an objective, independent, and high-quality expert evaluation of submitted manuscripts, as well as to improve their scientific quality.

 

Type of Peer Review.

The journal applies a double-anonymized peer review model. This means that:

• reviewers do not know the identity of the authors;
• authors do not know the identity of the reviewers;
• peer review materials remain confidential.

This model aims to minimize bias and ensure an impartial evaluation of manuscripts.

 

Initial Editorial Screening.

After submission, the editorial office performs an initial screening that includes:

• compliance with the journal’s scope;
• compliance with formatting and submission requirements;
• plagiarism screening;
• preliminary assessment of the scientific novelty and relevance of the research.

Manuscripts that do not meet the basic requirements of the journal may be rejected without being sent for peer review.

 

Selection of Reviewers.

Reviewers are selected by the editorial office based on the following criteria:

• scientific expertise in the relevant field;
• publications related to the manuscript topic;
• experience in scholarly evaluation;
• absence of conflicts of interest.

The editorial office may invite both internal and external experts, including international reviewers.

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers.

 

Ethical Principles of Peer Review.

Reviewers must adhere to the ethical principles of scholarly peer review.

 

Objectivity.

Reviewers should avoid any form of bias, including:

• negative bias related to nationality, language, or the research topic;
• positive bias related to the author’s reputation or honorary authorship practices.

 

Confidentiality.

Reviewers are required to:

• not disclose the content of the manuscript or the review to third parties, except the journal’s editorial office;
• not use information obtained during the review process for personal advantage.

 

Conflict of Interest.

Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest, including:

• competition in the same research area;
• personal or professional relationships with the authors;
• recent co-authorship;
• employment or administrative subordination.

If a conflict of interest exists, the reviewer must decline the review.

 

Peer Review Procedure.

After reviewers are appointed, the manuscript is sent to them for expert evaluation.

The standard time for preparing a review is 2 weeks.

If necessary, the editorial office may:

• appoint an additional reviewer;
• extend the review period;
• send the manuscript for a second round of peer review after revision.

Reviewers are expected to:

• carefully examine the manuscript;
• assess the scientific novelty, methodology, and validity of the results;
• provide constructive comments and recommendations to improve the manuscript;
• inform the editorial office about possible breaches of publication ethics.

The following practices are unacceptable:

• requests to cite the reviewer’s own publications for personal benefit;
• inappropriate or offensive comments.

 

Documentation of the Peer Review Process.

The editorial office ensures documentation of the peer review process.

The editorial history of a manuscript may include:

• date of manuscript submission;
• date of the first editorial decision;
• number of review rounds;
• date of article acceptance.

 

Editorial Decisions

Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editorial office may make one of the following decisions:

• accept the article for publication;
• accept after minor revisions;
• request major revisions;
• reject the manuscript.

The final decision regarding publication is made by the editor based on the reviewers’ reports and editorial evaluation.

 

Ethical Responsibility.

The most important ethical responsibility of reviewers and editors is to prevent the publication of unreliable or unsupported results.

All participants in the publishing process — editors, authors, reviewers, publishers, and affiliated institutions — are required to adhere to high standards of academic integrity and publication ethics.