Reviewing procedure

Published on 08 February 2014
Written by kshp. omd Hits: 1052

Reviewing procedure for the manuscripts of scientific articles contributed to “Forging and Stamping Production. Material Working by Pressure” journal

 

1. All the articles contributed to our Editorial Office are subject to review.
2. Editor-in-chief (or deputy editor-in-chief) assesses the article's compliance with the journal’s specificity, preparation requirements and forwards it to a selected review specialist (Candidate or Doctor of Science) or a member of the Editorial Board who has a scientific specialty most related to the article’s issue. In case of article’s non-compliance with the journal’s specificity the contributor is notified about the inability of publishing the article.
3. The review procedure is executed confidentially. Reviewers are informed that the contributed manuscripts are contributors’ private property and contain confidential information. Reviewers are not allowed to make any copies of the articles or forward them to a third-party reviewer without the permission from the Editorial Office.
4. The review schedule is determined upon confirmation with the reviewer.
5. The reviewer assesses the consistency between the title and the contents of the article as well as its compliance with the actual attainments in the considered area of science, identify article’s strengths and weaknesses and provide a report on the expedience of publishing the article.
6. The review procedure is executed anonymously. The review results are available for the contributor and the Supreme Certification Commission upon request and are provided without the reviewer's sign and with no indication of his/her name, position and employment place.
7. If the review report contains recommendations on reworking the article it's sent to the contributor along with a suggestion to implement the required changes and amendments or provide reasonable rebuttals for the issues remarked by the reviewer. Then the contributor-reworked article passes the second round of review or (in case of minor issues) it’s examined by the Editorial Board or Editor-in-chief (deputy editor-in-chief) regarding the implementation of the reviewer’s requirements.
8. In the event that the reviewer does not recommend the article for publishing the Editorial Board may reject the article or may forward it for reworking in accordance with the marked issues.
9. The final decision on publishing the article is made by the Editor-in-chief (deputy editor-in-chief) in accordance with the Editorial Board’s decision. The decision of the Editorial Board is recommendatory.
10. Articles contributed (co-contributed) by the members of the Editorial Board and managers of the correspondent centers of the journal may be published after having been examined by the Editor-in-chief (deputy editor-in-chief) without an additional round of review.
11. In case of article rejection a motivated refusal is sent to the contributor.
12. The Editorial Office does not save rejected manuscripts.
13. Manuscripts of the articles accepted for publishing and rejected manuscripts are not returned to the contributor.