The papers submitted to the editorial office are evaluated by domestic and foreign experts. The review process in the journal is confidendial: reviewers are kept completely confidential.
Once the manuscript is received, it is first checked by the managing editor for the criteria below:
If a defect is found in the paper at the initial review stage, it can be returned to the authors for revision. The papers are then sent to the editor-in-chief for review.
Reviewers must meet the following criteria when evaluating the papere:
The review period is one month. This period may be extended by the editorial board depending on the situation and at the request of the reviewer.
Getting a positive feedback is not enough to publish an article. The final decision on the expediency of the publication is made by the editorial board. In case of conflict, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.
When a negative opinion is received, a reasoned rejection is sent to the author, adding the speed of the opinion.
The editorial staff of the journal strives to ensure the highest quality of published papers and follows the principles and recommendations of the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE).
Papers submitted to the journal are checked through plagiarism. All papers suspected of plagiarism or self-plagiarism are immediately rejected.
When submitting the paper, the author should inform about the existence of potential conflicts of interest.
Reviewers should immediately notify the editors of any conflict of interest that may arise during the evaluation of the article. Such conflicts of interest may arise when the reviewer is asked to comment on an article by an author from the same team, or a former or current student, supervisor, or other author with whom he or she has a close relationship. Another type of conflict can arise when the author of the article competes with the reviewer in the same grant competition. In such cases, the reviewer must refuse to comment on the paper.