The procedure of reviewing manuscripts of scientific articles for publication

• 1. Every scientific article received by the editorial board has to go through the peer-review procedure.

• 2. The Executive Secretary estimates whether the article is written in accordance with the topic of the journal and if the outlet of the article is appropriate. Afterwards the article will be sent to the Doctor of Science or Candidate of Sciences, who has the closest specialization to the topic of the article.

• 3. The terms of reviewing in each case are determined by taking into account the creation of conditions for maximum operational publication of the article.

• Requirements for the review of the article for publication in the journal

• 4. The review must convey the following information;

  • - matching of the article and its heading:

  • - the article complies with the current achievements in the specific field of study;

  • - accessibility to readers from the point of view of language, style and material layout, clarity of tables, diagrams, drawings;

  • - reasonability of publishing the article based on previously published publications, novelty;

  • – what exactly are the advantages and shortcomings of the article, what corrections and additions need to be made by the author.

The reviewer recommends taking into account corrections of deficiencies noted or not recommend the article for publication.

• 5. The reviews are certified in the order established in the institution where the reviewer works.

• 6. The review is confidential. The author of the article has the opportunity to read the text of the review. Violation of confidentiality is possible only in the case of the statement of unreliability or falsification of materials contained in the article.

• 7. If the review contains recommendations for the correction and revision of the article, the Executive Secretary sends these remarks to the author with the offer to take the recommendations to account and to prepare a new version of the article or to argue them (partially or completely) with arguments.

• 8. The article not recommended by the reviewer of the publication is not accepted for reconsideration. The text of the negative review is sent to the author by e-mail, fax or regular mail.

• 9. The positive review is not sufficient grounds for the publication of the article. The final decision on publication is taken by Editorial Board and is recorded in the editorial board meeting protocol.

• 10. After taking the decision to accept the article for publishing, the executive secretary informs the author about it and specifies the time of publishing. The text of the review is sent to the author by e-mail, fax or regular mail.

• 11. The original articles are kept by the Editorial Board for 5 years.

• 12. The editorial office presents the copies of reviews upon requests of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.