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

Rules of reviewing

  1. All articles submitted to the journal's editorial board and pre-screened are subject to mandatory peer review to determine their compliance with scientific and editorial standards, ensure the required publication quality, maintain the journal's high scientific and theoretical level, and select the most valuable and relevant research papers.
  1. Scientific peer review is based on the principles of scientific methodology and adherence to scientific ethics and promotes an objective and unbiased identification of the strengths and weaknesses of the article under review.
  1. Reviews are conducted in compliance with confidentiality and intellectual property protection. Reviewers are not permitted to use peer-reviewed articles for their own research before their publication, to provide them to another person for review or inspection without the permission of the journal's editorial board, or to discuss the article's content with third parties.
  1. Reviews of each article are kept by the journal's editorial board for five years. Copies of the reviews are sent to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation upon receipt of a corresponding request.
  1. Articles submitted to the editorial board receive an individual registration number, ensuring the author's anonymity during review.
  1. Articles and the standard review form (Review Form) that have passed the Antiplagiat system check are sent for review to experts in the relevant subject area. These experts include renowned Russian and international scholars: doctors of science, candidates of science, professors, and associate professors with research papers on the topic covered in the article, as well as SSUGIT scholars listed on the list of reviewers approved by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal "Vestnik SSUGIT" (List of Reviewers). Reviewers evaluate manuscripts on a voluntary and non-commercial basis.
  1. The journal "Vestnik SSUGIT" adheres to double-blind (anonymous) peer review: authors are not informed of the names of reviewers, and reviewers are not informed of the names of the authors of the materials being reviewed. Authors and reviewers communicate exclusively through the editorial staff.
  1. Reviewers evaluate the relevance and scientific novelty of the article, as well as its structure and style. All comments and suggestions regarding the article are included in the review. If the reviewer's comments can be addressed, the article is sent to the author for revision. The journal's editors reserve the right to refuse publication to an author who chooses to ignore the reviewer's comments.
  1. A reviewer must review the submitted article within two weeks of its receipt and send a properly completed review to the editorial staff by email (certified in accordance with the procedures established by the reviewer's institution).
  1. The review period may be extended in the event of additional review or the temporary absence of the reviewer.
  1. Based on the review results, one of the following decisions is made:
    • the article may be published without scientific editing;
    • the article may be published with minor editorial revisions;
    • the article may be published only after corrections and additions have been made, without re-review;
    • the article requires corrections, additions, and re-review;
    • the article is not appropriate for publication.
  1. If the reviewer does not recommend the article for publication, the review must state specific reasons for this decision, clearly articulating any substantive and/or technical deficiencies identified. The review text is sent to the author.
  1. If the review is positive with comments, the article is sent to the author by email. The deadline for submitting a new version of the article, incorporating the comments, is two weeks. The amendments made must be highlighted in the text of the article.
  1. The corrected article is sent for re-review to the same reviewer or another reviewer appointed by the editors. If the revision deadline is not met, or the author disagrees with the reviewer's fundamental comments, or if the author does not provide a rationale for their disagreement with the comments, the editors reserve the right to reject the article. After receiving two reviews, the editorial board makes a final decision on whether to publish or reject the manuscript. If one positive review and one negative review are received, a third reviewer is appointed.
  1. An article accepted for publication is included in the journal's scheduled issues.