Rules of reviewing
+7 (383) 343-12-55 vestnik@ssga.ru
Ru
En
Ru
En
Guide for authors
Vestnik SSUGT Guide for authors Rules of reviewing

Rules of reviewing

  1. All articles submitted to the journal's editorial board and pre-checked are subject to mandatory peer review in order to determine their compliance with scientific and editorial standards, ensure the required quality of publications, maintain a high scientific and theoretical level of the journal, and select the most valuable and relevant scientific papers.
  1. Scientific peer review is based on the principles of scientific methodology, compliance with scientific ethics, and promotes objective and unbiased identification of the strengths and weaknesses of the article being reviewed.
  1. Reviews are conducted in compliance with the conditions of confidentiality and protection of copyright for intellectual property. Reviewers are not allowed to use the articles being reviewed for their own research before their publication, to pass them on to another person for review or review without permission from the journal's editorial board, or to discuss the contents of the article with third parties.
  1. Reviews of each article are subject to storage at the journal's editorial board for 5 years, copies of reviews are sent to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation upon receipt of a corresponding request by the editorial board.
  1. Articles submitted to the editorial board receive an individual registration number, which ensures the anonymity of the author during review.
  1. Articles and the standard review form (Review Form) that have passed the check in the Antiplagiat system are sent for review to specialists in the relevant subject area, who are well-known domestic and foreign scientists: doctors of science, professors who have scientific works on the issues stated in the article, as well as scientists of SGUGiT, indicated in the list of reviewers approved by the editor-in-chief of the journal «Vestnik SSUGT» (List of reviewers).
  1. The journal «Vestnik SSUGT» complies with the rules of double-blind (anonymous) reviewing: authors are not informed of the names of reviewers, reviewers are not informed of the names of the authors of the reviewed materials. The interaction of authors and reviewers is carried out only through the editorial staff.
  1. Reviewers evaluate the relevance and scientific novelty of the article, as well as its structure and style of presentation. All comments and suggestions regarding the article are indicated in the review. If the comments made by the reviewer can be corrected, the article is sent to the author for revision. The editors of the journal have the right to refuse publication to an author who wishes to ignore the reviewer's comments.
  1. The reviewer must review the article sent to him/her within 2 weeks of receiving it and send a properly completed review to the editors by e-mail (certified in the manner established by the institution where the reviewer works).
  1. The review period may be extended in the event of additional reviewing or temporary absence of the specialized reviewer.
  1. Based on the review results, one of the following decisions is made:
    • the article can be published without scientific editing;
    • the article can be published with minor editorial amendments;
    • the article can be published only after making corrections and additions without re-reviewing;
    • the article needs corrections, additions and re-reviewing;
    • it is not advisable to publish the article.
  1. If the reviewer does not recommend the article for publication, the review must state specific reasons for such a decision with a clear formulation of the identified substantive and/or technical deficiencies.
  1. The editorial board's reasoned refusal to publish the article and the text of the review are sent to the author.
  1. In the case of a positive review with comments, the article is sent to the author by e-mail. The deadline for submitting a new version of the article with the comments taken into account is 2 weeks. The amendments made must be highlighted in the text of the article.
  1. The corrected article is sent for a second review by the same reviewer or another one appointed by the editorial board. In the event of a repeated negative review result, the article is rejected. In exceptional cases, the article may be sent for consideration to a commission consisting of representatives of the editorial board, which may classify the article as polemical and publish it as a scientific discussion.
  1. If the revision deadlines are not met or the author disagrees with the reviewer's fundamental comments, as well as in the absence of arguments for the author's disagreement with the comments put forward, the editors reserve the right to reject the article.
  1. After receiving the review, the editorial board makes a final decision on publication or refusal to publish. The decision of the editorial board is made by a majority vote. In the event of a tie, the editor-in-chief's vote is decisive. The quorum for making a decision is set at 50% of the total number of members of the editorial board.
  1. The article accepted for publication is included in the journal's release plan.