The Process of Reviewing
The Procedure of Reviewing the Manuscripts
A review is a text containing critical appraisal of a work and designed for publication (after the work is published), as well as for internal use – with the goal of making a decision about whether or not to publish it.
The editors make a distinction between internal and external reviews.
The internal review is implemented by the editor-in-chief.
The object of the internal review is aimed at evaluating works in terms of whether or not they correspond with the profile of the edition, considering the question of any required additional revision of the text by the authors, attracting the scholarly and technical editors, presenting manuscripts for external reviews, etc. The editor assesses the topicality of the subject, the exposition of the material and the scholarly significance of the examined work.
The outcome of each review contains one of the following conclusions:
1) The manuscript may be published in its present form (after undergoing the processes of proofreading and correcting the text);
2) The manuscript may not be published in its present form (it does not correspond to the profile of publication and to the criteria of a scholarly article (see Rules for Manuscripts).
3) The manuscript may be published, but only after it has been revised and/or corrected in correspondence to the critical remarks made by the reviewers, the members of the editorial board and the editors. In such cases the author shall be advised to make the appropriate changes and additions.
An external review makes it possible to obtain a more objective evaluation of the work made by experts in the relevant field.
The Process of Peer Reviewing
1. The Editorial Board takes into consideration and reviewing the following manuscripts (previously unpublished): articles, essays, abstracts of scholarly surveys, reports on conferences, etc. (see Requirements for Manuscripts).
2. The primary reviewing is carried out by the editor-in-chief, who assesses whether or not the manuscripts comply the with the thematic range of the journal, as well as whether or not the article conforms to the style, format and profile of the publication.
3. The process of reviewing is obligatory for all manuscripts submitted to the editors, regardless of the authors’ possession of academic degrees, titles or official positions.
4. The process of reviewing (peer reviewing) is performed by the members of the editorial board or reputable expert scholars. The reviewers involved must be holders of Ph.D. degrees, Doctors of Arts, Academicians, Professors and University lecturers of Higher Educational Establishments of Culture and Art.
5. The editorial board stipulates the objective process of reviewing and tracks the movement of the manuscript before putting into production.
6. A repeated reviewing process shall take place in the following cases:
– If the manuscript develops controversial issues which require juxtaposition of different points of view of the experts making the decision concerning its publication;
– If the author has submitted a drastically new version of the article in compliance with the critical remarks of the review within the designated time frame.
7. The review processing shall take place within the period between 14 and 30 days after receipt of the manuscript.
8. The review shall note: the scholarly significance of the chosen article, the significance of the subject, the completeness of use of sources and literature, the depth of their analysis, the effectiveness of the chosen methods of research, the degree of novelty of the work, the validity of conclusions, the practical and theoretical significance of the research.
9. The content of the review shall be communicated to the author(s) within 10 days after receipt of the reviews by the editorial board.
10. The review processing of materials submitted to the journal remains confidential.
11. The journal is based on the model of the “double-blind” reviewing. This means that during the process of reviewing the personal data of the reviewers and the authors shall be withheld.
12. All the reviewers are acknowledged specialists in the subject matter of the reviewed texts and have had publications on the subject matter of the reviewed article during the last 3 years.
13. The reviews are preserved in the offices of the publishing house and the editors for the period of 5 years.
14. The editors send copies of the reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation upon a receipt of the appropriate request into the editorial board.