THE CASPIAN REGION:Politics, Economics, Culture

Scientific journal

Reviewing

All the articles sent for the publication in the scientific journal The Caspian Region: Politics, Economics, Culture are subject to mandatory review.

Upon the receipt in the editorial office materials undergo an initial technical check for the compliance with the submission requirements and check in the system .ǔ (anti-plagiarism software). The main body of the article (without the reference list) should have not less than 80% of originality. The volume of citations in the article should be no more than 10%. Self-citation is not allowed. The authors' output data, common phrases and clich?s, names of regulatory documents, proper names, etc., can make up to 10% of the citations. Materials that do not meet the journal requirements shall be returned to the author for revision.

In case of the successful initial technical check, the articles are sent for review. The reviewer is appointed by the editor-in-chief from the members of the editorial office (if necessary, it is allowed to involve external experts whose choice is determined by their achievements in a particular scientific field, availability of publications in the relevant field of the research, which proves their ability to determine the scientific value of the work).

The article undergoes "blind" review: the manuscript is sent to the reviewer without indicating name of the author and information about him, and the author has no information about the reviewer.

The reviewer evaluates the relevance of the article to the journal topic; relevance of the article topic to its content; quality of the abstract; relevance of the keywords to the article content; topicality; scientific novelty; coverage of the topic; language, style and logic of the presentation; completeness and quality of the conclusions.

As a result of the article review, the reviewer gives the following conclusions:

  • the article is recommended for publication;
  • the article required improvement (with the comments);
  • the article is recommended to be rejected (indicating the reasons).

The reviewer submits the review to the editorial board within 5-6 working days from receiving the article. If it is necessary to revise the article, it is returned to the author with the text of the review. After the editorial board receives the revised article, it is sent back for reviewing. The date of receipt of the final version of the article is considered to be the date of its receipt by the editorial board.

If the reviewer recommends an article for publication, it is sent for examination to obtain an opinion on the absence of information constituting a state secret, as well as for examination by the Intra-University Export Control Commission (IUECC).

After the editorial board has received expert advice on the possibility of publishing the materials, the articles are included in the current issue, in order of priority.

If the reviewers opinion is negative, the article is considered at the meeting of the working group of the editorial board, which decides on the rejection of the manuscript or on the need to obtain an additional review. If the article is rejected, a review is sent to the author with an indication of the reasons. The rejected article is not accepted for reconsideration.

The reviews are kept in the journals editorial office for 5 years.

The editorial board undertakes to send copies of the reviews to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation upon request.