Information for reviewers
Reviewers of scientific papers submitted to the journal commit to:
-
Conducting thorough, objective reviews of the presented scientific articles, following ethical standards, and refraining from some form of non-scientific criticism. Reviewers' comments and opinions returned to the authors should be impartial, clear, and concise.
-
Meeting deadlines for review submission. If other professional commitments prevent the reviewer from meeting deadlines, they should refrain from reviewing. In the event of a delay, the reviewer should notify the journal's editorial team of an extension of the review deadline.
-
Making every effort to enhance the scientific value of the reviewed scientific articles, including by indicating to the authors other sources not included in the work but relevant to the research field.
-
Refraining from reviewing if the field to which the reviewed scientific articles pertain lies outside their scientific expertise, and/or if there is a conflict of interest between the author(s) and the reviewer.
-
Informing the journal's editorial team of any breaches of ethical standards in the reviewed articles, particularly regarding plagiarism and self-plagiarism.
-
Informing the journal's editorial team of possible conflicts of interest between the author(s) and the reviewer. Reviewers may decline to review if they believe that evaluating the work poses a conflict of interest or contradicts their interests.
-
Adhering to confidentiality rules regarding all information related to the review process. Papers may only be shared with others with the consent of the author, editors, or publishing team.
Review Process
For each issue of the semi-annual journal, the editorial board appoints at least two independent reviewers.
A reviewer is required to evaluate the article according to the criteria provided in the "REVIEW TABLE.pdf" form. In the case of texts written in a foreign language, at least one of the reviewers is affiliated with a foreign institution other than the author's nationality. The reviewer signs a declaration of no conflict of interest. The review must be in written form and conclude with a clear decision on whether to accept the article for publication or reject it.
The names of the authors submitted for review are not disclosed to the reviewers (double-blind review).
Based on the reviews, the article is either sent for printing, or in the case of rejection, it is not forwarded for publication. After verification of the text, it may be submitted for the next issue of the journal.
The names of the reviewers for individual issues are not disclosed; however, once a year, a list of collaborating reviewers is made public on the journal's website.
