Peer Review Process


Editorial responsibility. Responsible editors are responsible for everything published in the scientific publication. We strive to: meet the needs of authors and readers; continually improve the publication of each issue; adhere to procedures that ensure the quality of published materials; to defend the freedom of author's thought; to introduce the principles of academic integrity; prevent the discrediting of intellectual and ethical standards by commercial interests; always ready to make corrections, explanations and apologies if needed.

The editorial board can reject the manuscript without reading it, if it considers that the work does not correspond to the journal’s profile.

Relations with authors. The decision of the responsible editors to accept or refuse the article to publication should be based on the significance of the article, its originality, clarity of presentation, reliability of the information presented in it and its relevance to the subject of the scientific journal. Responsible editors should not change the decision to publish articles except when the publication can cause serious misunderstandings. The procedure for reviewing articles by other scholars is clearly defined, and the editors are ready to justify any significant deviation from the described procedure. The scientific publication has a clearly defined mechanism for filing the appeal by the authors of the decision editors. Responsible editors are obliged to publish full requirements to the authors of the articles, to inform about the date of submission of the article to the editorial board and the decision to publish.

This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access

Relations with reviewers. Responsible editors should publicize full requirements for reviewers, including the requirement to keep the reviewed material confidential. They have the right to require the reviewer to disclose any information about a possible conflict of interest before giving consent to a review. Responsible editors should follow the procedure for protecting the anonymity of reviewers if they do not use an open review system, which should be informed both by authors and reviewers.

In addition, editors have the right: 1) to encourage reviewers to write comments on ethical issues or the likelihood of malicious behavior in connection with the conduct of the review procedure; 2) ask reviewers to comment on the degree of originality of the article under consideration and to pay attention to the possibility of duplicate publications or plagiarism (compilation); 3) Provide, whenever possible, to reviewers tools to improve access to the publications directly relevant to a peer-reviewed article (for example, hyperlinks to quoted articles and bibliographic searches); 4) to inform authors about all comments about their articles made by reviewers, if they do not contain offensive remarks or slander; 5) to note the contribution of reviewers to the activities of the scientific journal; 6) analyze the quality of work of reviewers and take measures to ensure that it is carried out at a high level; 7) develop and maintain a database of reviewers, update it on the basis of analysis of the results of their work; 8) refuse to cooperate with those reviewers who constantly write incorrect, untimely or poor-content reviews.

Relations with members of the editorial board. The responsibilities of the editors in charge include: 1) to establish procedures for professional review of articles; 2) perform the functions of representatives of a scientific publication; support and promotion of the scientific publication; search for the best authors and best articles; analysis of articles submitted for publication; execution of assignments for writing editorials, reviews and commentary on scientific works.

Editors in charge should advise on their interests that may affect their objectivity in editing and reviewing articles (conflict of interest). Such interests may be intellectual, financial, personal, political, religious, etc.

Editing and review processes. Responsible editors should ensure fair, unbiased and timely review of articles that are proposed for publication. They must apply procedures that allow the confidentiality of materials submitted to the scientific publication to be reviewed during the review, in particular: to ensure that the experts included in the editing process (review) have sufficient qualifications and awareness in relevant issues, recommendations and facts on reviewing and managing scientific publications; Be aware of recent reviews on reviews and new tools that can be applied in the process of writing a review; choose the methods of review that are most suitable for the scientific publication; periodically analyze approaches to reviewing for possible optimization.

The procedure of the review is anonymous both for the reviewer and the authors and is carried out in the shape of the double-blind review.

The reviewers shall keep up with the demands of the Committee on Publication Ethics, be unbiased and objective.

The review indicates one of the conclusions for the manuscript:

1) to recommend the article for publication without changes;

2) to recommend the article for publication taking into account the reviewer’s comments and recommendations, which are agreed with the author / authors;

3) to return the article to the author for revision with further reviewing;

4) to refuse the author/authors to publish the article.

Providing of the quality. Responsible editors should take all reasonable steps to ensure the quality of their published material, as well as apply procedures for detecting falsified data, to form a scientific journal style on the basis of objective methods.

Protection of personal data. Responsible editors must comply with the law of confidentiality in the jurisdiction to which they are directly related. In addition, in any case, they should always protect the confidentiality of individual information obtained during the research or other professional activities.

Actions in case of suspicion of the author's academic dishonesty. Responsible editors should take certain measures in the event of suspicion of malicious behavior or accusation in it. This duty applies to both published and unpublished materials. Ethically, they are required to respond to such cases. First of all, responsible editors should to require for clarification from the authors of such articles. If they receive an unsatisfactory response, they should contact the employer or the relevant organization with a request to investigate.

Ensuring scientific reliability in publications. Mistakes or deceptive assertions must be corrected as soon as possible with further communication to the general public. Responsible editors should take all measures to verify the reliability of archived published material, as well as to check whether the published material is securely archived, to apply systems for prompt access by authors to original research materials.

Intellectual property rights. Responsible editors should be attentive to intellectual property issues and interact with the publisher when dealing with potential violations of intellectual property laws and agreements. In their competence, they use tools for detecting plagiarism in articles submitted to a scientific journal, sponsor authors who have been infringed or those who become victims of plagiarism (for example, to request a recall of articles or removal of materials from a website).

Complaints. Responsible editors must respond quickly to complaints and do their utmost to satisfy the inquiries of those who are not satisfied with the complaint.

Conflicts of interest. The private information or ideas received during the review should remain confidential and not be used for the personal benefit of the editors-in-chief. The editor-in-chief must recuse himself (instruct the deputy editor-in-chief or other member of the editorial board to review the manuscript for him) to review the manuscript, in connection with which he has a conflict of interest as a result of competitive relations, cooperation or other relations and relationships with one from authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions associated with submitted manuscripts.

Publication Frequency

Frequency: four times a year.

The materials are reviewed by members of the editorial board of the publication and / or third-party independent experts, edited on the principle of objectivity and adherence to the positions of higher international academic quality standards.
The editorial staff reserves the right to edit the manuscript stylistically and to reduce it while maintaining the author's style. Editors agree with the author, which, in the editorial's opinion, can change the content of the text.
The editorial board of the scientific publication reserves the right to reject articles that do not meet the requirements and subject matter of the journal.
The opinions and suggestions expressed in the articles are not necessarily the same as those of the editorial board. The authors are responsible for the accuracy of the information contained in the articles, the accuracy of titles, statistics, surnames and citations, etc.
Submitted materials are non-returnable and cannot be published in other scientific journals.
In cases of plagiarism, the authors of the materials provided are responsible.

Open Access Policy

This journal practices a policy of immediate open access to published content, upholding the principles of free dissemination of scientific information and global knowledge sharing for overall public progress.
This is an open access journal. Users are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full text of articles, or use them for any other legitimate purpose, without the prior permission of the publisher or author. This is in line with BOAI's definition of open access.