Experts in the field provide reviewing of all scientific articles accepted to consideration. The whole process of peer review proceeds through the E-submission system.
Reviewing in the journal is “double-blind”, i.e. neither the reviewer, nor the author of the article, does not aware of each other's identities.
The review is a key document that explains the acceptance or rejection of the article, and therefore is mandatory for determining the level of quality of the submitted material. Quality refers to compliance with the stated requirements of the journal, which are based on the thematic coverage of the publication and the requirements for the format and scientific content of incoming articles.
Terms and procedure of peer review
The standard period for the preparation of one review is 4 weeks. Please, remember that the work of reviewers is carried out on a voluntary basis, therefore the review period depends on their availability and may be increased.
Based on the review, the reviewer chooses one of the possible conclusions:
- accept;
- send for revision - after the author completes the article, it is sent for re-review;
- reject.
Usually, the editor appoints 3 scientific reviewers per article. But if the opinions of the reviewers are different, the editor may attract additional reviewers.
When sending an article after revision, the author should either correct the suggested by reviewer moments or explain the inability to do so. For discussion with reviewer and editor use the field “Discussion” on the article page. The standard deadline for the revision of the article is 2 weeks. If you need more time for correction, please, inform the editorial staff on the article page.