Scientific papers submitted to the editorial board of the journal The Science of Person: Humanitarian Researches are considered for compliance with the journal profile and the layout requirements and are registered.
All papers submitted to the editorial board are subject to mandatory peer review. Reviewers are scientists with a recognized authority working in the field of knowledge, which the paper deals with.
The paper is submitted for review to editorial board members without giving any information about the authors. The reviewer’s identity information is also confidential. A breach of confidentiality is only possible with the reviewer’s consent at the request of the author.
Upon mutual agreement, the author and reviewer can communicate without the mediation of the editorial office, if it is necessary for working on the manuscript and there are no obstacles of a personal nature.
Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of papers or give part of the paper for review to another person without the editors’ permission. Reviewers have no right to take advantage of knowledge about the work content until the paper is published.
The review is written according to the standard form proposed by the editorial board or in a free form. If there is an indication that the paper has to be corrected, it is sent to the author for revision. In this case, the date of submission to the editorial board is considered to be the date of return of the revised paper. If the paper, upon the reviewer’s recommendation, was significantly revised by the author, it should be reviewed repeatedly.
The editorial board reserves the right to reject a paper if the author is unable or unwilling to take into account the editors’ suggestions.
If the paper receives negative reviews from two different reviewers or one negative review of its revised version, it is rejected without consideration by other members of the editorial board.
In case of disagreement with the reviewer’s opinion, the author of the paper has the right to submit a reasoned answer to the editorial board of the journal. The paper can be sent for re-review or for approval to the editorial board.
The decision on publishing the paper after reviewing is made by the editor-in-chief, and if necessary, by the editorial board as a whole.
The reviewer should:
1. Assess the relevance of the paper content: whether the level of the presented material corresponds to modern achievements of science and technology.
2. Assess the significance of the research results (scientific and practical).
3. Specify to what extent the requirements for the layout of the paper have been taken into account: the correspondence of the paper volume, the presence of the abstract in Russian and English, a list of references and references to it in the text, etc.
4. Assess the paper from a methodological point of view and determine whether it meets the requirements for teaching this discipline.
5. Provide a qualitative and/or quantitative assessment of the factual and illustrative content of the paper.
6. Assess the completeness and reliability of the presented information.
7. Assess the correctness and accuracy of the used (or introduced) definitions and statements. 8. Present reasonable conclusions about the paper as a whole, comments, if necessary – recommendations how the paper can be improved.