Authors send materials to the email address of the online periodical svki.izvestiya@bk.ru.
Review of materials is carried out in the order of their receipt. An urgent or accelerated procedure for review and publication of materials is not provided.
The period for preliminary review of materials is up to 10 calendar days. The person responsible for the issue checks the compliance of the article with the subject matter of the publication, the author’s compliance with the formatting requirements, and determines the level of borrowings in accordance with the “Anti-Plagiarism” system (the share of quoted text and borrowings in the article must not exceed 25 %). If these criteria are not met, the person responsible for the issue has the right to ask for the necessary corrections to be made or to reject the materials.
Materials not rejected on formal grounds are sent for scientific peer review. The peer review period is 10 calendar days.
The editorial board makes a decision on the publication of the article based on the reviewer’s conclusions. The article may be accepted for publication, sent to the author for revision (with detailed recommendations from the reviewer), or rejected. The editorial decision is communicated to the author.
The total period for reviewing the material does not exceed one month from the date of its receipt.
The selection of materials for the current issue is determined by editorial plans. The person responsible for the issue of the online periodical informs the authors of approved articles about the publication dates.
Procedure for peer review of materials
The periodic online periodical publishes original scientific articles that have not been previously published in other print and online scientific (popular science) publications, scientific research results, theoretical and experimental works carried out by the scientific and pedagogical staff of scientific and educational organisations (institutions), candidates for academic degrees, as well as citizens conducting scientific research on their own initiative.
The article submitted for publication must be relevant, possess novelty, contain a statement of tasks (problems), an assessment of the degree of their scientific elaboration, a description of the main research results obtained by the author, conclusions, and also comply with the formatting rules.
The decision on inclusion of the article in the next issue of the online periodical is made based on the results of the verification of the manuscript for originality and in accordance with the reviewers’ recommendations. Peer review of manuscripts is carried out for the purpose of their expert evaluation.
A reviewer is appointed taking into account the scientific profile of the article. Reviewers are recognised qualified specialists in the subject matter of the peer-reviewed scientific articles, who have publications in the subject area of the reviewed articles within the last 3 years, and who are not affiliated with the authors. A reviewer cannot be the author or co-author of the reviewed article.
Peer review is conducted confidentially. The review is confidential and is provided to the author of the manuscript upon his request without a signature and without indicating the surname, position, place of work of the reviewer (“double-blind peer review”).
The peer review period does not exceed 10 days from the moment the reviewer receives the article. It may be extended in the event of a temporary impossibility of involving a specialist in the field of the publication for review.
The review must contain a qualified analysis of the manuscript material, an objective reasoned assessment of the article and substantiated recommendations. The review must assess:
- compliance of the content of the article with the subject matter of the scientific journal, i.e., determination of the scientific specialty in which the article is written;
- scientific level, practical significance, terminology, structure of the manuscript, relevance of the topic;
- logical and understandable exposition of the author’s thoughts in scientific language for the readership without ambiguous understanding of the material, as well as accuracy of word usage;
- style of exposition, correspondence of the methods, techniques, recommendations and research results used by the author to modern achievements of science and practice;
- presence of a problem and description of its solution;
- stylistically correct use of the conceptual apparatus;
- presence of analysis of literary sources and description of the degree of elaboration of the investigated problem;
- place of the reviewed work among others already printed on a similar topic: what is new in it or how it differs from them, whether it duplicates the works of other authors;
- inaccuracies and errors made by the author.
In the concluding part of the review, conclusions are drawn about the features of the article, its advantages and disadvantages, and remarks requiring revision are formulated.
If the reviewer indicates the need for revision or reworking of the material, the article is returned to the author.
If the author disagrees with the reviewer’s opinion, the author of the manuscript has the right to provide a reasoned response to the editorial board of the journal.
Based on the results of peer review, the reviewer makes a conclusion:
- recommend the article for publication;
- recommend the article for publication after revision (with indication of remarks);
- not recommend the article for publication (with justification of refusal).
If the reviewer recommended revision of the article, it is sent to the author together with the remarks for their correction. The revised article, together with the author’s response to each item of the remarks, is again sent for review to the same reviewer. If it meets the requirements, the revised and reviewer-approved article is returned to the editorial board for a final decision on the possibility of publication.
An article not recommended for publication is not accepted for re-consideration. Manuscripts of articles are not returned.
The editorial board does not enter into correspondence with authors regarding the reviewer’s remarks and decisions made. If a decision is made to reject the publication, the editorial board sends to the authors of the submitted materials copies of the reviews or a reasoned refusal.
Reviews are kept in the editorial office for 5 years. The editorial board sends copies of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia upon receipt of a corresponding request to the editorial office of the publication.
The founder does not make payments to the author(s) for the publication of a scientific article, nor does it pay remuneration to the author(s) for the exclusive rights to the article transferred under the license agreement.
Scientific articles published in the online periodical must not contain information constituting state, official, or commercial secrets. The final decision on inclusion of the article in the next issue of the online periodical is made by the editor-in-chief.
Procedure for publication of materials
If after peer review the decision on the advisability of publication is positive, the manuscript is sent for literary editing and proofreading.
The editorial board reserves the right to make decisions on the design of the publication, its rubric and title, as well as to reduce the volume of the article.
The editorial board coordinates with the authors changes of a fundamental nature that entail the risk of distortion of logical meaning or inadequacy to the author’s intention. The editorial board has the right to make stylistic, syntactic and punctuation changes for the purpose of bringing the text into compliance with literary norms of agreement.
The editorial board reserves the right to reject articles if the author is unable or unwilling to take into account the editorial wishes.
Responsibility for the content of figures, their design and the results of mathematical analysis during pedagogical experiments, as well as for the accuracy of the information in the reference list, lies with the author.
If the received review contains remarks or is negative, the author is recommended to revise the manuscript and take into account these remarks or, accordingly, a reasoned refusal is sent to him, to which the review is attached.
The revised version is sent to the reviewer for re-review.
The decision on the advisability of publication after peer review is made by the Editor-in-Chief, and if necessary, discussed at a meeting of the editorial board. If there are disagreements among the members of the editorial board regarding the publication of the article, the issue of its publication is decided by a simple majority of votes. In the case of an equal number of votes, the vote of the Editor-in-Chief is decisive.
The Editor-in-Chief carries out a general review of the issue of the journal.
After the general review of the issue of the journal, the Editorial Board organises a meeting at which the final decision on the issues of publication and placement of the journal in information systems is made.
The Editorial Board forms the final camera-ready copy of the journal.
The material is placed in the publication within the established deadlines. The date of publication is considered to be the date of placement of the article on the website of the online periodical.
Publication of materials in the online periodical “Proceedings of the Saratov Military Institute of the National Guard Troops” is carried out on a free-of-charge basis: no fee is charged from authors for review, peer review and placement of articles.
