Reviewing

The process of the analysis of scientific articles is orientated on establishment of the degree of their value, originality, actuality and scientific expediency for the prerogatives of the Collection, fitness of manuscript for a publication with taking into account the experience of leading scientific communities; on the increase of high quality of the printed matters, overcoming of prejudice and injustice at a rejection or acceptance of the articles. The order of criticizing the manuscripts determines the procedure of monitoring the manuscripts of scientific articles, presented by authors to the collection of scientific papers «Problems of Modern Psychology (farther is Collection), and standards of the articles, which determine quality of the published materials.

The aim of criticizing is standard-setting of authorial manuscripts quality.

The tasks of criticizing consist in verification of:

  • general scientific level of the article, in particular research actuality, presence of problem in it, its meaningfulness for decision of the important scientific and practical tasks, correctness and expediency of methods application at the conducted researches, level of generalization at formulation of research conclusions and others like that;
  • semantic filling and framework of the article;
  • correctness of the use of professional (special) vocabulary and others like that.

Criticizing is conducted confidentially on the principle of double-blind review: the authors are not revealed to the names of reviewers, the reviewers are not revealed to the names of authors. Co-operation of reviewers and authors is carried out only through the members of editorship. The unique registration code which provides the author’s anonymity at criticizing is appropriated to manuscripts, presented for a publication in the Collection.

The Editorial board nobody reveals the information which touches a manuscript (table of contents, process of criticizing, critical remarks of reviewers, final decision), except the members of editorial council of the Collection, the author and reviewers.

Reviews appear only to the members of editorial board of the Collection and the author. On inquire of the Author the Editorial Board informs about its decision to accept the article for publication. The decisions could be as following: 1) to recommend the article for publishing in the author’s variant, 2) to recommend for publishing after the correction, accepting the remarks and proposals of the reviewer, 3) necessary additional reviewing and appointment of other reviewer after correction of the article taking into consideration the remarks and proposals, which were done by the reviewer, 4) reject the article.

The Reviewer sends a conclusion to the Editorial Board of the Collection about the appropriateness or inappropriateness of the article publishing. The terms of viewing in every special case can be changed according to the conditions, creation of which is necessary for the optimal objective valuation of the manuscript. Positive reviews, which assure the possibility of publishing of the articles, are made public on the sittings of International Editorial Council and Editorship.

Terms of reviewing of the article are from the day the article was got for reviewing and are from one until two months.