Procedure of reviewing scientific articles

  1. Research papers, received by editorial board, answering the subjects of the journal, prepared in accordance with the requirements, undergo a peer-reviewing procedure.
  2. In case of rejection of sending a manuscript to revision, author receives a reasoned reply.
  3. We examine only previously unpublished manuscripts.
  4. Chief editor Associate Editor determines, whether an article answers the subject of the journal and meets the requirements, and forward it to reviewing to examination with PhD or ScD degree, who is a recognized expert on the subject of peer-reviewed material.
  5. Manuscript is passed to a reviewer without any information about the authors.
  6. While conducting a critical review of the manuscript reviewers should ensure that:
    • Manuscripts are confidential materials given to a reviewer in trust for the sole purpose of critical evaluation. Details of the manuscript must not be given to the third party for reading or discussion if they are not authorized by the editors.
    • The evaluation of the material is impartial. The review is objective and carries a well-grounded assessment of the research findings, as well as critical сcomments as to clarity of presentation, contribution to the field, originality and the validity of the results. Reviewers should avoid the criticism of the author. The reviewers’ evaluations give occasion to the definitive decision on an article.
    • The information obtained during the peer-review process must not be used for the reviewers’ own advantage.
    • The reviewer who does not have enough expertise for the manuscript evaluation or cannot be objective (Conflict of Interest) should recuse themselves from the peer-review process.
  7. Time constraints for the procedure of reviewing is defined by the chief editor, individually for each case. Maximum reviewing period (between the date of acceptance of the manuscript by the editor till the editorial board makes it's decision) is 2 months.
  8. The editors do not disclose the information about the reviewer
  9. The following items are pointed out in the review:
    • Originality and novelty of the presented material.
    • The division of the article into clearly defined sections.
    • An adequate background and a survey of the existing researches on the subject.
    • Clarity and consistency of presentation.
    • Conclusions and their validity.
    • Types of article: for example, theoretical, methodical, applied, review, etc.
    • The reviewer’s recommendation should be either: accept; requires corrections in accordance with the reviewer’s recommendations; not suitable for the journal.
  10. If the review contains recommendations for editing and (or) finalizing an article, it is sent to an author with a proposal to take into account the recommendations in preparing a new version of an article or arguments to refute them. An improved paper is sending back for reviewing.
  11. In a case, where the reviewer does not recommend an article to publication, editorial board may send back an article to be rewritten, taking into account the comments made on it, as well as send it to another reviewer. Text of a negative review is also sent to an author.
  12. Manuscripts, which receives contradictory reviews, should be forwarded to an additional reviewing. If a manuscript receives two negative reviews, publisher has a right to reject the submitted manuscript immediately and not to publish it.
  13. The final decision on publication of an article is taken by the chief editor together with аssociate еditors.
  14. When a positive decision on publishing an article is taken, the author is informed. Text of a review is sent to an author via Internet.
  15. Originals of the reviews are stored at the editorial office for three years.
  16. The editors do not undertake any obligation on time constraints of publishing the manuscript.
Journals per 2017
Journals per 2016
Journals per 2015
Journals per 2014
Journals per 2013
Journals per 2012
Journals per 2011
Journals per 2010
Journals per 2009
Journals per 2008
Journals per 2007
Journals per 2006
Journals per 2005
Journals per 2004
Journals per 2003
Journals per 2002

© 2013-2017 Journal "Regional research".
All rights reserved.

When using the site materials online publications, direct, active hyperlink, indexable by search engines, active hyperlink on a web site is required.