PEER REVIEW PROCESS
Content
Peer-review process of manuscripts submitted to the RJERM 1
Peer-review process of manuscripts submitted to the RJERM
The edition carries out reviewing of all materials received by the editorial board, corresponding to its subject matter, for the purpose of their expert evaluation.
When an article is received, the editorial board accepts it for review only if it complies with the RJERM journal profile, as well as the requirements for the design of materials, originality, clarity and consistency of the presentation in a competent Russian language, etc. In case of non-compliance with these requirements, the article will not be accepted for review; the editors will notify the author within 10 days with the indication of the reason for rejection.
Articles are reviewed by members of the editorial board and the editorial council of the journal, as well as by external invited reviewers from leading experts in the field, working in the scientific areas corresponding to the topic of the article and have within the last 3 years publications on the subject of the peer-reviewed paper. The decision to choose one or another reviewer to conduct the review of the article is made by the executive editor or deputy editor-in-chief. The period of reviewing is 2-4 weeks, but it can be extended at the request of the reviewer.
Reviewing articles in the RJERM journal is not paid.
All correspondence related to the publication of the article, the editors conduct with one representative of the team of authors.
Each reviewer has the right to refuse a review if there is a clear conflict of interest affecting the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials. Based on the results of the manuscript review, the reviewer makes recommendations on the further fate of the article (each reviewer’s decision is substantiated):
– the article is recommended for publication in its present form;
– the article is recommended for publication after the shortcomings noted by the reviewer have been corrected;
– the article needs additional reviewing by another specialist;
– the article cannot be published in the journal.
The peer review is confidential. The author of the article under review is given the opportunity to read the text of the review. The identities of reviewers are not disclosed to the author, unless the reviewer decides to enter into direct correspondence with the author.
The editorial board sends to the authors of the submitted papers copies of reviews or a reasoned refusal, and also undertakes to send copies of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation if there is a corresponding request to the editorial board.
If the review contains comments or recommendations for correcting the article, the executive secretary of the journal sends the text of the review to the author with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the article or reasonably refute them. The article revised by the author is sent for reviewing again within 14 days. If the authors refuse to finalize the materials, they must notify the editors in writing or orally of their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version in 3 months, even in the absence of information from the authors with a refusal to finalize the article, the editors remove it from the register. In such situations the authors are sent a corresponding notification about deregistration of the manuscript in connection with the expiration of the period of time given for revision.
The article modified by the author is re-sent for review within 14 days. If the authors refuse to finalize the materials, they must notify the editors in writing or orally of their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version in 3 months, even in the absence of information from the authors with a refusal to finalize the article, the editors remove it from the register. In such situations, the authors are sent an appropriate notification of the removal of the manuscript from registration due to the expiration of the time allotted for revision.
If the author and reviewer have an insoluble conflict about the article, the editorial board has the right to send the article to another reviewer. In conflict situations, the editor-in-chief makes the final decision.
If the article is not recommended for publication by the reviewer, the editorial board sends a reasoned refusal to the author. If the author does not agree with the reviewer’s reasoning, he can appeal to the chief editor, by whose decision the article can be rejected or sent to another reviewer. An article not recommended for publication by a reviewer will not be accepted for reconsideration. A message about the refusal to publish is sent to the author by e-mail.
Upon receipt of a positive review, the article is recommended for publication in the RJERM. At the same time, the presence of a positive review is not a sufficient basis for publishing an article.
The original reviews are stored by the publisher and the journal’s editorial office for 5 years.
After the editorial board makes a decision on the acceptance of the article for publication, the editorial board informs the author about it and indicates the terms of publication.
Privacy declaration
Protection of personal data of the participants of the publication process is one of the priority tasks in the publication of materials in the journal. The editors take the necessary measures to protect the personal data of the authors of articles, reviewers of the journal and members of the editorial board and editorial board.
Information about the author of the article, including surname, name, patronymic, name and address of affiliated organization, e-mail address, is used only for the purposes of scientific publication. The editorial board undertakes not to pass the information about the author to third parties for use for other purposes. By submitting an article for publication, the author consents to the use of the specified information for the purposes of publication, including for the familiarization of readers, correct quotation by third parties. Other personal information, including contact phone number, can only be used by the editorial board to contact the author during the preparation of the article for publication.
The editorial board is obliged not to inform third parties, except reviewers, about the content of the materials submitted for publication. Information about the reviewer is not provided to the author of the article. The editorial board also warns reviewers about the need to maintain confidentiality when reviewing and not to disclose information about the article and the results of reviewing to third parties. Reviews on articles prepared by the reviewer can be published only in agreement with the editorial board and the reviewer and with the consent of the author of the article.