Peer review process

In order to ensure the article’s quality, manuscripts received by the editors undergo double-blind reviewing, Two reviewers, who are the members of the editorial board and knowledgeable in the pertinent subject area, are given manuscripts which contain no reference to the authors' surname(s), and the authors have no access to the identities of the reviewers. Since the reviewers do not know who the author of the article is, the article succeeds or fails on its own merit

The review is to deal with the following issues:

  • Does the article manifest a scientific approach and does it correspond to the profile domain of the publication?
  • Do the results presented display verifiable originality?
  • How logical is the material in the article?
  • Is the usage of terminology accurate?
  • Is the list of sources set up correctly?
  • Are the conclusions of the article consistent with the content?

The reviewer’s form contains the following statements: 

1) Reject.

2) Accept with major revision and further review.

3) Accept with minor revision and further review.

4) Accept unconditionally.

Though, if the manuscript is unacceptable at this stage, but the study is promising, the referee will offer some ways how to improve it and will encourage the author(s) to resubmit the paper.