Peer review
Before the start of the review, the article undergoes an initial check (within 7 days) for compliance with the subject matter of the publication and the general requirements for submission (see the Author's Guidelines).
Reviewers are leading experts from Ukrainian and foreign universities or scientific institutions specialising in the field of submitted articles. Reviewers are appointed by the Editor-in-Chief.
Reviewers are obliged to adhere to the principles of copyright and confidentiality of publishing ethics: they cannot use the results of the reviewed work before its publication.
The review period is one month.
The timeframe for publication is six months.
The term of storage of reviews is three years.
The review procedure consists of three stages:
- Reviewers receive the text of the article without indicating authorship through their personal account on the publication's website / e-mail.
- Reviewers fill out a typical Reviewform, which involves evaluating the manuscript according to the following criteria: the relevance and novelty of the research, the theoretical and practical significance of the work, the relevance of the used literature, the logic and consistency of text structure, the validity of the conclusion, compliance with the norms of academic style.
Reviews must comply with the ethical policy of the journal. Authors are not informed of the names of Reviewers, Reviewers are not informed of the names of Authors. Interaction between Reviewers and Authors is carried out only through the Executive Secretary.
Reviewers can:
- recommend the article for publication without corrections;
- recommend the article for publication after taking into account the comments of the reviewer;
- recommend the article for publication after careful revision;
- do not recommend (reject) the article for publication.
The reviewer submits the completed review (scanned copy) either through the reviewer's personal account on the journal's website or by sending it to the Editorial Board by e-mail.
Articles by members of the Editorial Board undergo a standard procedure of independent external review, but members of the Editorial Board do not participate in reviewing their manuscripts.
Based on the results of the review, the editorial board makes a decision:
- accept the article for publication;
- return the article to the author for revision, taking into account the comments of the reviewer;
- return the article to the author for thorough revision and submit the revised version to the same reviewer for re-examination;
- refuse the author to accept the article for publication.
The editors provide the authors with copies of the reviews (without indicating the names of the reviewers) and inform them of the adopted decision.
Decisions on rejecting articles, both at the stage of preliminary consideration or during the review stage, are final.
The main reasons for refusal to publish:
- violation of the publishing ethics principles;
- non-compliance with Author’s Guidelines;
- plagiarism (self-plagiarism);
- unreliability of facts, statistical data, proper names, quotes, vocations and translation;
- low scientific level of the article (irrelevant literature used, insufficient evidence base of the obtained research results, illogicality and inconsistency of text structure, unfounded conclusion, non-compliance with the norms of academic style).
