Reviewing articles

STATUS OF REVIEW OF ARTICLES

I. GENERAL PROVISIONS

The review procedure passes all articles submitted to the editorial board. The purpose of the review is to facilitate the strict of author’s manuscripts for publication and to make specific recommendations for their improvement. The review procedure is focused on the most objective assessment of the content of the scientific article, its conformity with the requirements of the journal and provides a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the materials of the article. Only articles that have a scientific value value and contribute to solving urgent national economic problems and tasks are accepted for publication. Separately, account is taken of the level of compliance with the rules for preparing the article for publication in the scientific journal (see Requirements for the registration of articles).

The main purpose of the review procedure is to eliminate cases of poorly-practiced research and to ensure the coordination and balance of interests of authors, readers, editorial board, reviewers, and the institution in which the research was conducted. The number and type of manuscripts referring to the review, the number of reviewers, the review procedure and the comments of the reviewers may vary.

Manuscript review is confidential. Submitting a manuscript to a review, the authors entrust editors with the results of their scientific work and creative efforts, which may depend on their reputation and career. The disclosure of confidential parts of the review of a manuscript violates the rights of the author. Editors do not disclose information relating to the manuscript (including details of its receipt, content, review process, criticisms of reviewers and final conclusions) to anyone other than authors and reviewers themselves. Violation of confidentiality is possible only in the case of a statement of untrustworthiness or falsification of materials, in all other cases, its preservation is mandatory.

II. PROCESS OF REVIEW

The author submits an article to the editorial board that meets the requirements of the journal policy and the rules for preparing articles for publication. Manuscripts that do not meet the accepted requirements are not registered and are not allowed for further consideration, as reported by their authors. The article is registered by the responsible secretary in the journal of articles registration, with the indication of the date of receipt, the name, П.І.Б. author / s, place of work of the author / s. Articles are assigned an individual registration number.
The responsible secretary conducts a preliminary assessment of the articles submitted to the editorial board, the content of the profile material and the topics of the journal, sends them for review to the members of the editorial board, the scientific editors of the sections, experts on the issues considered.
All manuscripts submitted to the editorial board shall be directed to one study by the profile of the study, and, if necessary, to two reviewers. Appoints reviewers Editor-in-Chief. By decision of the Chief Editor of the magazine (under certain circumstances), appointment of reviewers may be entrusted to a member of the editorial board. In some cases, the issue of the choice of reviewers is decided at the meeting of the editorial board.
For the review of articles reviewers may be members of the editorial board of the scientific journal, as well as third-party highly skilled specialists who have deep professional knowledge and experience in a particular scientific field, usually doctors of sciences, professors.
After receiving the article for consideration (within 4 days), the reviewer evaluates the possibility of reviewing the materials based on the relevance of his own qualifications to the author’s research direction and the absence of any conflict of interest. In the case of any competing interests, the reviewer may refuse to review and notify the editorial board. The latter should decide on the appointment of another reviewer.
The reviewer, as a rule, within 14 days makes a conclusion about the possibility of printing the article. The review periods may vary in each individual case, taking into account the creation of conditions for the most objective evaluation of the quality of the materials provided, but should not exceed 1 calendar month.
The review is conducted confidentially on the principles of double-blind review (double-blind review, when neither the author nor the reviewer knows about each other). The interaction between the author and the reviewers is through the responsible secretary of the magazine. At the request of the reviewer and in agreement with the working group of the editorial board, the interaction between the author and the reviewer can take place in an open mode (such a decision is made only if the openness of the interaction will improve the style and logic of the presentation of the research material).
For all articles submitted for review, the level of uniqueness of the author’s text is determined by means of the corresponding software, which shows the level of uniqueness, source and the proportion of the text coincidence (“eTXTAntiplagiaat”, “Advego Plagiatus”).
After final analysis of the article, the reviewer fills in the standard form (Review Form), which contains the final recommendations. The e-mail editor informs the author of the review results.
If the reviewer indicates the necessity of making certain corrections to the article, the article is sent to the author with the suggestion to take into account the comments when preparing the updated version of the article or to substantiate their refutation. By the revised article, the author adds a letter that contains answers to all comments and explains all the changes that were made in the article. The corrected version is re-submitted to the reviewer for making a decision and preparing a motivated conclusion about the possibility of publication. The date of acceptance of the article for publication is the date of receipt by the editorial staff of a positive opinion of the reviewer (or decision of the editorial board) regarding the expediency and the possibility of publishing the article.
In case of inconsistency with the opinion of the reviewer, the author of the article has the right to provide an argumentated response to the editorial staff of the magazine. In this case, the article is considered at the meeting of the working group of the editorial board. The editorial board may send an article for additional or new review to another specialist. The editorial board reserves the right to reject articles in case of insolvency or unwillingness of the author to take into account the wishes and comments of reviewers. At the request of the reviewer, the editorial board may submit the article to another reviewer with the obligatory adherence to the principles of double-blind review.
The final decision on the possibility and appropriateness of the publication is taken by the Chief Editor (or, on his instructions, by a member of the editorial board), and, if necessary, by the meeting of the editorial board as a whole. After deciding to allow the article to be published, the Chief Secretary notifies the author thereof and indicates the expected publication period.
In the case of a positive decision on the possibility of publication, the article enters the editorial journal of the magazine for its publication in the order of the order and relevance (in some cases, according to the decision of the Editor-in-Chief, the article may be published in advance, in the next issue of the magazine).
The final decision on the composition of printed articles is fixed by the minutes of the meeting of the Academic Council of the Institute of History, Ethnology and Archeology of the Carpathians, which is marked with a corresponding note on the second page of the cover of the magazine.
Approved for publication the article is submitted to the technical editor. Minor corrections of a stylistic or formal nature that do not affect the content of the article are made by the technical editor without the consent of the author. If necessary or at the request of the author, manuscripts in the form of a layout of articles are returned to the author for approval.
The responsibility for copyright infringement and non-compliance with existing standards in the materials of the article rests with the author of the article. The author and reviewer are responsible for the authenticity of the facts and data presented, the validity of the conclusions and recommendations made and the scientific and practical level of the articles.

ІІІ. RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE RECENTER:

Reviewers provide a written review of the manuscript, at the end of which, on the basis of the analysis of the readiness of the material, it is concluded that the article can be published;

If the reviewer recommends the article before publication after revision with comments or does not recommend the article before publication – the reasons for such a decision should be stated in the review;

The reviewer must review the submitted article within the time agreed with the responsible secretary and send to the editorial office (by e-mail) a reasoned refusal to review or review;

Reviewers evaluate the theoretical and methodological level of the article, its practical value and scientific significance. In addition, reviewers determine the compliance of the article with the principles of ethics in scientific publications and provide recommendations for eliminating cases of their violation;

Reviewers are reported that the manuscript sent to them is the intellectual property of the authors and relates to non-disclosure information;

Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of the review provided for the article or to use knowledge of the content of the article prior to its publication;

The review takes place on a confidentiality basis, when information about the article (terms of receipt, content, stages, and peculiarities of the review, comments of reviewers and the final publication decision) are not communicated to anyone except authors and reviewers. Violation of this requirement is possible only in case of presence of signs or a statement about the unreliability or falsification of materials of the article.

IV. RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE AUTHOR:

The author of the review work is given the opportunity to review the text of the review, in particular if he does not agree with the conclusions of the reviewer;

In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer, the author of the article has the right to provide an argumentated response to the editorial staff of the magazine. The article may be aimed at re-reviewing or agreeing to the editorial board;

Articles sent to authors for correction must be returned to the editorial office no later than 2 weeks after receipt. If the article is returned in a later period, the date of its receipt for printing is changed accordingly;

The author is informed by the responsible secretary about the timing of the publication of the article within a maximum of one month from the date of receipt of the positive opinion on the publication of the article.

HOW TO SUBMIT ARTICLES IN THE JOURNAL THAT ARE AN ANNUAL PROCESS OF REVIEW AND SELECTION OF ARTICLES?

First, as a scientist and researcher, you want to share the results of your research with the scientific community, in which scientists of international reputation play an important role. By gaining access to the international community, you will be able to develop relationships outside the country, deepen your specialization, promote research development, and enhance your personal status. However, access to international academic circles involves knowledge and compliance with international standards, which include, in particular, the anonymous review and selection process.
Secondly, the publication of articles in magazines that have the procedure of anonymous review and selection of articles, helps in the professional activity. It is clear that career growth has its peculiarities in different countries. However, a scientist who seeks recognition abroad should know the criteria for professional improvement that are used in other countries. One such criterion is publication in magazines with anonymous selection of articles. It is these publications that are considered a measure of status and trust in you as a scientist, and, therefore, determine career growth opportunities. So, for an international career, publication in such magazines is necessary, otherwise your professional capabilities will be limited enough.
Finally, anonymous selection and review of articles is a good way to the International Science and Self Development, allowing you to learn about other research and development. Moreover, thanks to the edited articles there is an opportunity to improve their own writing skills.