Press "Enter" to skip to content

Review Process


  1. The manuscript of an article submitted for publication in the Journal is accepted by the executive secretary with a written notification of the author and a guarantee of confidentiality.
  2. The responsible secretary checks the manuscript for compliance with the submission rules. If the manuscript satisfies the specified rules, then the executive secretary includes the article in the current work plan of the Editorial Board. If the manuscript does not meet the specified rules, then the responsible secretary returns the article to the author indicating the discrepancy with the submission rules.
  3. ll members of the Editorial Board are informed in advance (no later than a week before the meeting of the Editorial Board) about the date, time, place, agenda of the meeting and copies of the manuscripts of articles submitted for consideration are sent. In case of absence from the meeting, a member of the Editorial Board may communicate his opinion on the articles in writing.
  4. The article included in the work plan of the Editorial Board is discussed at the meeting of the Editorial Board. On each scientific work submitted for publication in the Journal, the opinion of the members of the Editorial Board is heard and a separate decision is made. With a positive decision, the members of the Editorial Board make proposals for organizing the review of the manuscript, a reviewer is appointed from among highly qualified scientists with deep professional knowledge and experience in a particular scientific area. In case of a negative decision of the Editorial Board, the executive secretary returns the article to the author, indicating the reasons for rejecting the article.
  5. The executive secretary sends the reviewer a copy of the manuscript of the article with a written notification that the submitted manuscript is the private property of the authors and refers to information not subject to disclosure. The deadline for submitting a review is specified in a letter to the reviewer and, as a rule, does not exceed one month.
  6. The reviewer is responsible for the quality and objectivity of the examination of the manuscript.
  7. In accordance with paragraph 8 of the regulation on the journal “Reports of the Adyghe (Circassian) International Academy of Sciences” the review should contain: – a qualified analysis of the article, an objective reasoned assessment of the results; – general analysis of the scientific level, terminology, structure of the article, relevance of the topic, compliance of research results with modern achievements of science; – reasonable recommendations for improving the scientific level of the article; – comments reflecting the inaccuracies and errors made by the author. The final part of the review should contain substantiated conclusions about the article as a whole and a clear recommendation on the advisability of publishing it in the Journal in a specific scientific direction or on rejection.
  8. The journal reviews all materials submitted to the editorial office, corresponding to its subject matter, with the aim of their expert assessment. All reviewers are recognized experts on the subject of the peer-reviewed materials and have, over the past 3 years, publications on the subject of the peer-reviewed article.
  9. If the reviewer recommends publishing the work without changes, then the article is included in the next issue of the Journal. The author is notified in writing by the responsible secretary.
  10. If the review of the article contains an indication of the need for its revision, then it is sent to the author for revision, with a copy of the review attached without indicating the name of the reviewer. After receiving the text modified by the author, the manuscript is again considered by the Editorial Board. The date of receipt is the day of receipt by the editors of the final version of the article.
  11. If the reviewer indicates the inappropriateness of publishing the article, then the work is rejected, about which the author is notified in writing by the responsible secretary, with a copy of the review attached without indicating the name of the reviewer.
  12. In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer, the author of the article has the right to provide a reasoned answer to the editors of the Journal. The article can be sent for re-reviewing or for approval by the Editorial Board.
  13. The editors of the journal must submit copies of reviews at the request of expert councils of the Department for Certification of Scientific and Scientific and Pedagogical Workers of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation or the Higher Attestation Commission.
  14. The original reviews are kept in the editorial office of the journal for 5 years.
  15. Materials sent to the editorial office are not returned to the authors.
  16. The editors do not assume any obligations on the terms of publication.
  17. Authors are not charged for publication, authors are not paid royalties.

©​ | 2022 | Адыгская (Черкесская) Международная академия наук