Reviewing procedure

Prior to reviewing manuscripts are considered and assessed for publication by the editor-in-chief and vice editor-in-chief.

The submitted manuscript is then forwarded to specialists in the given sphere of research for peer-review. All the reviewers are acknowledged experts in the field  and have publications on the subject matter of the reviewed manuscript during the past three years

The reviewer evaluates the manuscript on the basis of originality, scientific novelty and theoretical and practical importance to the field. The reviewer gives recommendation for acceptance or rejection of the manuscript or provides comments and suggestions focused on improving the quality of the manuscript.

The work requiring corrections is returned to the author with the reviewer’s comments and suggestions.

The author must accept all the comments and make appropriate changes in the electronic text and indicate the place of the changes made. After that the manuscript is resubmitted to the Editorial Board for second review. In case the author does not agree with the reviewer’s comments the former should to provide a concise and clear justification of the reasons for disagreeing with the observations made. 

The editors reserve the right to reject without reviewing the manuscripts that do not comply with the profile of the journal, or with the specifications outlined in the Instructions for Manuscript Preparation.

The manuscript which received a positive review is sent to the Editorial Board.

The final decision on the publication of the article is taken at a meeting of the Editorial Board