- Scientific (research) articles submitting to the Editorial Office for publication should correspond to the topical profile of the journal and to the List of scientific disciplines by Higher Attestation Council; the manuscripts should be designed in accordance with the rules of the Council and journal’s Editorial Office.
- If a submitted manuscript fits to the journal profile and well designed the Editorial Office will accept it and send for reviewing; the improperly subjected and/or designed manuscripts would be declined without reviewing.
- The accepted manuscripts could be reviewed by members of the journal’s Editorial Board or invited specialists; all potential reviewers are prominent specialists in their respective fields of knowledge and have recent publications (during the last 3 years) on the topics corresponding to the topic of a manuscript to be reviewed.
- The reviewers are notified that the manuscripts sent to them for reviewing are the exclusive property of the authors of the manuscripts and that the information from the manuscripts cannot be disclosed. The reviewing is entirely confidential and anonymous.
- The term of the reviewing for each manuscript is individual and determined by the Editorial Office.
- A review should state the urgency and scientific novelty of a research presented in a manuscript and should contain the conclusion on the possibility of its publication.
- If a reviewer declared critical comments and/or observations regarding the contents of a manuscript then the manuscript would be redirected back to the authors for correction; the necessary corrections should be made by the authors as soon as possible, during no longer than one month.
- The manuscripts declined by reviewer(s) would not be repeatedly accepted for reviewing.
- In case if the authors would not react to the reviewers’ comments and refuse to make the necessary corrections their manuscript would be declined by the Editorial Office.
- In case of positive conclusion by reviewer(s), after proper correction (if necessary) and positive decision by the Editor-in-Chief the manuscript will be prepared for publication by the Editorial Office; the authors will be informed on the term of the publication.
- In case of negative conclusion by reviewer(s) the final decision on the publication will be made by the Editor-in-Chief; in this case the article could be published as an open to discussion.
- Positive conclusion by the reviewer(s) is not a guaranty of the publication; the final decision on the publication and publication term after the reviewing will be made by the Editor-in-Chief or, if necessary, by the Editorial Board.
- The Editorial Office should send to the authors the copies of the reviews and/or motivated refusal notification; the copies of the reviews could be also sent to the Ministry of Education and Science of Russian Federation (on request).
- The reviews would be stored in the Editorial Office for 5 years.
link_vocab1
