Review

The journal uses double-blind peer review, the identities of both reviewers and authors are concealed from each other throughout the review. 

All the manuscripts undergo review. The Editorial Board performs an initial check and verification for compliance with the topics of the periodical, with submission guidelines, editorial policies and ethical standards.

If the article does not comply with the subject-matter of the periodical, it is excluded from revision, and the author is notified about it.

Articles that pass the initial assessment stage, and are within the scope of the journal, are analyzed for plagiarism. Every submitted paper undergoes plagiarism detection by Crossref Similarity Check powered by iThenticate, only after which the paper is assigned for further consideration and review. 

Once the manuscript successfully passes the check, it is sent for peer review to external reviewers.

The review process is anonymous for both the reviewer and the author.

After reviewing the manuscript may be:

1. Rejected
2. Returned to the author for revision.
3. Accepted for publication.

The review includes:

Evaluation of the paper content and judgment on whether it is suitable for publication.

Enumeration of methodology and tools errors (if there are any).

Suggestions for the text improvement.

In case of an unfavorable verdict of the reviewer, the manuscript is discussed on the session of the Editorial Board, which makes a decision on rejecting of the article or the need for the further review by another independent expert.

The final decision on the manuscript publication and approval of the whole content of the article are adopted at the Editorial Board’s meeting.

The review and approval of manuscripts is from 1 to 1, 5 months, and then they are published in order.

Making manuscript ready for the publication presupposes fine-tuning of the text by the Editorial Board accor­ding to the editorial standards adopted for the periodical.