Peer-reviewing

THE PROCEDURE OF REVIEWING ARTICLES SUBMITTED TO THE EDITORS OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL “HISTORICAL STUDIES OF SOCIAL PROGRESS”

 

1. Manuscript is sent via email to the editorial’s address: issp-gnpu@uk.net. Structured article is submitted to the deputy editor, who appoints reviewers.

2. Reviewers receive a standart review form with the article.

3. The reviewers are supposed to define:

•        if the contents of the article corresponds to the declared title;

•        if the contents of the article corresponds to the profile of the journal;

•        if the contents of the article is new;

•        if the article corresponds to the scientific level of the journal;

•        if it is reasonable to publish the article taking into account the previous literature on the subject and if it may be interesting for a wide range of readers;

•        what sorts of positive and negative features characterize the article, what sorts of corrections can done in case the article has some drawbacks;

4. The term of the reviewing is 1 month.

5. Reviewers return the manuscript with a comprehensive review of the article, which defines the relevance of the topic, positive side of the study and drawbacks are stated.

The review ends with a clear conclusion: "Accepted to print", "Revision" or "Not recommended for publication" (with the reasons for rejection).

6. If one reviewer gave a positive review of the article, and the other negative, the article is sent to a third reviewer for a final verdict.

7. If the article need improvement, the manuscript is returned to the author with an indication of drawbacks. Having revised the article the author sends it to the editor, and reviewer verifies how his remarks were corrected and provides a new conclusion.

8. Following the recommendations of the reviewer of the article "Accepted to print" manuscript is submitted to the meeting of the Editorial Board to approval of content of the current issue of the magazine, where the publication of this article is recommended.

Reviewer form