Peer Review Procedures

When reviewing manuscripts (hereinafter referred to as “Articles”) submitted for publication in Vestnik of Nosov Magnitogorsk State Technical University, the following procedures of peer reviewing shall be applied:

1. Only articles that meet the presentation requirements shall be accepted for review.

2. Review shall be done by experts with doctoral or PhD degrees who specialize in the relevant fields of study.

3. The type of review is a double “blind” review: when the author and the peer reviewer have not met before and know nothing about each other.

4. Review term: no longer than one month from the moment the peer reviewer has received the submission.

5. A review shall foreground the following:

• The topicality of the issues being resolved;
• The originality and relevance of the solutions proposed;
• The degree of scientific originality of the research findings;
• The degree of practical significance of the research findings;
• The style and grammar of the article contents;
• The key strengths and weaknesses of the article.

6. The closing section of a review should give a reasoned opinion about the article and should expressly state if the article is worth being published in the journal or if it can be improved or should be rejected.

7. If the article’s review says it needs revision, the responsible secretary of the journal shall forward the review to the author with a proposal to re-write the article following the reviewer’s comments or to provide his/her reasons for disagreeing with the reviewer’s comments (partially or in full).

8. Within one month the author should re-write the article and submit it to the journal together with a written response to the reviewer’s comments (as a separate file or by highlighting the changes in the article text). The revised article shall be sent for review together with the author’s comments. The acceptance date shall be deemed the date of submission of the revised article.

9. The maximum review time is two months from the date the manuscript was submitted to the date when the final decision by the Editorial Board has been taken.

10. The Editorial Board shall have the right to reject the article if it fails to meet the journal’s requirements or if the author is unable or unwilling to revise his/her article following the reviewer’s comments.

11. An article that in the reviewer’s opinion should not be published shall not be accepted for further review.

12. In the event of a negative review of the article or its revised version, the article shall be rejected and the author shall be notified about the reasons of such decision.

13. Once the Editorial Board has produced a positive decision about the article, the update shall be posted on the journal’s website together with the expected date of publication.

14. Articles that were submitted and registered earlier shall be published first. At the same time, papers covering scientific problems of high relevance and containing innovative or original ideas may be published outside the established order as decided by the Editorial Board.

15. All reviews shall be kept for a minimum period of 5 years.

16. If requested, copies of the reviews shall be forwarded to the Russian Ministry of Education and Science.