Peer-review process
The author submits to the Editorial Board of the Journal an article that complies with all the requirements of the Journal.
Before the reviewing the Editor/secretary of the Journal:
- examines the manuscript for compliance with the remit of the Journal with general requirements for specialty publications.
- determines the level of originality of the author’s text with the help of the program. If the original text works out less than 60 percent the article will not be admitted for further reviewing and will be returned to the author.
- encodes the article (assigns registration number and impersonalizes data about the author of the article).
Encoded article via email is sent to referee. This is a so-called double-blind review when neither author nor reviewer knows each other. In such a case, the peer-reviewing procedure is anonymous both for the author and referee.
Within 5 consecutive days starting from the day when the article was received the referees shall estimate the possibility of peer-reviewing taking into consideration their own qualifications, the announced topic, and the absence of the conflict of interests. Upon the existence of any private (material or non-material) interest which can potentially influence the referee’s unprejudiced decision, a reviewer should inform the Managing editor, and if there is any conflict of interests or other noes for reviewing the Managing editor shall decide to appoint another referee. The referee should give reasons for refusing to review an article.
Within 10 consecutive days starting from the day when the article was received referee should present a conclusion on whether the article can be published in the Journal. Based on the results of reviewing the referee fills out a standard form, where he or she draws one of the following conclusions:
- to recommend the article for publication
- to send the article back to the author for correcting and finalizing
- not to recommend the article for publication.
If a referee draws a conclusion on correcting and finalizing the article the Managing editor/secretary with the approval of the Editor-in-Chief sends the article to the author with the list of the referee’s critical remarks, questions, and comments. The term finalizing is determined by the Editor-in-chief.
The final decision on publication is made by Editor-in-Chief or by the working party if the situation so requires. The Managing editor/secretary informs the author about the decision.
The article to be published is given to the Managing editor. Insignificant stylistic corrections which do not affect the contents of the article can be made by the editor without the author’s prior consent.
Successfully refereed articles would be elaborated by the Managing editor and form the next issue of the Journal. It is signed by Editor-in-Chief and recommended for publication by the decision of the Academic Board.
