Scientific professional edition

Memo to the reviewer

The review procedure passes all articles sent to the editorial board. The review is intended to: a) facilitate the selection of author’s manuscripts for publication; b) make specific recommendations for the improvement of materials.

In accordance with editorial policy of the journal, the review procedure is anonymous.


evaluate the theoretical and methodological level of the article, its practical value, scientific significance;

determine the compliance with the requirements of the journal, the principles of ethics in scientific publications;

provide recommendations for eliminating identified shortcomings.

In a review of the relevant materials (manuscript of the article), the reviewer is required to determine:

relevance and relevance of materials (articles) to the subject of the journal;

the scientific level and novelty are presented for the publication of the results, their practical significance;

the advantages and disadvantages of the content and the presentation of the material;

specific recommendations for the revision or reduction of the article material;

the possibility (or impossibility) of publishing a peer-reviewed article in the Journal.

When visiting the editorial board of the Journal, positive (or negative) reviews of this article with her are reviewed by one of the members of the editorial board, who presents the materials (article) along with a review at the meeting of the editorial board, where a decision is made on its publication in the Journal or its rejection.

Further work with the materials (manuscript), accepted for publication, is carried out by the editorial staff in accordance with the technological process of preparation of the number.

Negative reviews are sent to the authors. Anonymity of reviewers is guaranteed by the editorial staff of the magazine.

Manuscripts to be refined are sent by the editorial staff to the authors along with the text of the review containing specific recommendations for the finalization of the article. The authorship of the review is also not disclosed.

The manuscript of the article received after the revision, together with the authors’ response, is sent to the reviewer for review and additional review. The reviewer must, within the prescribed time limit, submit a revision to the editorial board, on the basis of which the editorial board decides on the acceptance of materials or their rejection.

In case of rejection of the manuscript of the article at the meeting of the editorial board, the editorial office in an electronic form informs the authors: “Dismissed by the decision of the editorial board of the magazine” with a brief justification, for example, “the article does not correspond to the subject of the magazine”, “the article did not pass the competition”, etc.

Dear Reviewer!

We remind you that the manuscripts sent to you are the intellectual property of the authors and relate to non-disclosure information. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of the article submitted for review, or to use information about its content prior to publication.

Please use a special form for review.