Guidelines for article review

1. Articles are to be sent to the editorial board of the journal in accordance with the Instructions for authors on article submission for publication in a scientific journal.
2. When a manuscript is submitted to the editorial board , it goes through the initial referral and the verification of its compliance with the subject-matter of the publication and the requirements to the manuscript registration. In case of non-compliance with these requirements the article is not submitted for review. The author is provided a notification about it.
3. In case of compliance of the manuscript with the formal requirements to the publication, the article is directed for reference to a reviewer from the editorial board for the expert assessment. The article can be directed to an independent expert. The authors of the articles or other interested parties are not involved into reviewing process. All reviewers are recognized as experts in subject of the reviewed materials and have within the last 3 years of the publication on subject of the reviewed article. The reviewer is notified about the fact that the article is the copyrighted property of the author. The disclosure or other use of the article contents prior to its publication is not permitted. The review terms are from 7 to 30 days from the date of the article submission for review.
4. Reviews contain objective assessment of the article content and structure, analysis of the article strengths and weaknesses, evaluation of the scientific level of presentation of data.
In particular the reviewer notes:

  • scientific novelty and originality of the results obtained by the author;
  • compliance of the article with the branches of science, which the article is submitted to;
  • adequacy of the source base for the solution of the problem;
  • compliance with the rules of citing and using the results of other authors in the work;
  • adequacy of the used research methods to the object and the subject of the study, sufficiency and reliability of the experimental data presented in the work;
  • contribution of the article structure to interpretation of scientific content of the work;
  • compliance of the title, the annotation, and the list of key words to the content of the article;
  • stylistic features of presentation, correctness in the use of terminology, quality of tabular and illustrative material (if any);
  • compliance of findings and conclusions presented in the article with tasks in hand and obtained experimental data;
  • other advantages and disadvantages of the work.

5. Conclusion of the reviewer is formulated by one of the following options:

  • The manuscript is recommended for publication (in the absence of any remarks).
  • The manuscript is recommended for publication under condition of making recommended amendments in the text (if any insignificant remarks)
  • The manuscript needs to be improved in accordance with the presented comments and re-reviewed (if any substantive remarks).
  • The manuscript needs to be rejected (at that the reviewer is obliged to give reasons for the conclusion).

6. The review is to be signed by its author with an indication of the place of work of the reviewer, his/her position, academic titles and degrees. The signature is to be attested by the seal; the date is to be provided.
7. As a result of the review the article can be rejected, sent to the author for revision, or accepted for publication. The publisher directs the copies of the peer reviews or motivated refusal to the author of article.
8. In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer the author has the right to give a reasoned response to the editorial board of the journal. The article can be directed for re-review or for approval to the editorial board.
9. The decision about the worthwhileness of the publication after the review is taken by the editor-in-chief (or deputy editor-in-chief), and if necessary, by the editorial board altogether.
10. In case of a positive conclusion the editorial board carries out preparation of the article for publication, which is text editing and its fine-tuning to the required editorial standards accepted in the journal. Editorial changes obtain approval from the authors.
11. The article is published in the current issue of the journal.
12. Reviews are stored in the publishing and editorial office for 5 years. Upon request Editorial Board undertakes to direct the copy of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.