The manuscript goes through a double-blind peer review: neither authors, nor reviewers know each other. Submitted manuscripts are directed to at least one, but usually two external experts who work in the relevant area.
The article goes through a double-bling peer review. If the referee reports are positive, the article is recommended to print. If both referee reports are negative, the article is rejected. In case if reviews are contrary (one positive and one negative), then editorail board sends the article for review to the third reviewer. Editors reserve the right to accept an article for publishing if it does not meet certain requirements, but subject to finalization of the text by the author. The final decision on admission of article to publication is accepted by the editorial team. In case of rejection of the article, the author may read the referee reports and editorial modifications.
The Rules for Peer-Reviewers
- The main task of peer-reviewer is the evaluation of submitted articles. He or she makes the decision to publish or not the submitted articles. Peer-reviewer via Editor-in-Chief may give the author the advice how to improve the submitted articles.
- Peer-reviewer communicates directly with the Editor-in-Chief or the Executive Secretaries.
- Peer-reviewer must be specialist of the high level in the domain which is presented in the submitted articles.
- Each submitted article is considered as confidential material and should be sent only to the chosen reviewers by Editor-in-Chief or Executive Secretaries after consultations with Editor-in-Chief.
- Peer-reviewer must be objective, inform the Editor or the Executive Secretaries about any similarities of the submitted articles with the articles which he or she knows.
- Acceptance and rejection of submitted articles must be grounded on the peer reviewer's arguments which should be clear and avoid any personal criticism.