Rules of the direction, reviewing and publication of scientific articles in the journal "The Bulletin of the Adyghe State University, the series “Economics”
1. Editorial Team of the journal accepts and carries out reviewing of all submitted materials (scientific articles, scientific reviews, proceedings of scientific conferences, scientific reports) corresponding to its subject for the purpose of their expert assessment.
2. The journal follows the rules of double "blind" (anonymous) review (the reviewer does not know who is the author of article, the author of article does not know, who is the reviewer). This reviewing is made by members of Editorial Board of the journal, or third-party experts from base of specialist experts (reviewers), at the request of the Editor-in-Chief.
3. All our reviewers are acknowledged experts in corresponding scientific fields and have published papers in the area of reviewed paper within the last three years.
4. The material is recorded in the Editorial office stating delivery date, name of author/authors, place of work, contacts for cooperation, material name, which is assigned a unique registration number.
5. The manuscript is accepted for examination, if it is written in accordance with the requirements for submitted manuscripts.
6. Before sending the material for review, it is checked with the program "Anti-plagiarism". Detection of a big amount of borrowings implies rejection of the material.
7. The administration of the editorial staff sends the manuscript for reviewing to member/members of the editorial board according to the scientific areas of the journal. In case of controversial issues or when the article is received from a member of the editorial board or a member of the editorial council, the Editor-in-Chief sends the manuscript for reviewing to external reviewers.
8. The editorial staff reserves the right (in agreement with the author) of literary editing, as well as of the refusal to publish the article (on the basis of the review of members of the editorial board), if the article does not conform to the profile of the journal or it has quality problems in material presentation. Manuscripts rejected after reviewing are not considered once again. In case of article rejection the editorial board sends a reasoned refusal to the author.
9. The editorial board recommends using the traditional form of review. In the review the following components should be reflected: the relevance and the originality of the theme, its theoretical or applied significance, the validity of the conclusions formulated by the authors and their correlation with known scientific and methodological approaches. Also a personal contribution of the author/authors to solving the discussed problem, the consistency and clarity of the presentation and the correct use of involved sources are mentioned in the review.
10. Authors of submitted manuscripts receive from Editorial Board a copy of peer review or substantiated refusal. If requested, Editorial Board sends copies of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.
11. All reviews remain deposited in the editorial archive for 5 years.
12. After receiving the necessary reviews on the submitted material, the editorial board takes the decision about the publication or refusal to publish the manuscript. On request, the editorial board informs the authors about the taken decision and sends to the authors the reviews. Editor-in-Chief co-ordinates the whole work of editorial staff sends the current issue to the press and licenses for the placement of the journal on the website.
13. In the case of reviewer’s recommendations to rework the manuscript, the text of the review is obligatorily sent to the author/authors without reviewer’s name.
14. Article, modified by the authors, is sent for reviewing for the second time together with its original version as soon as possible. Article, retained for a period of more than three months or requiring to be reworked one more time, is considered as a new submission.
15. Reviews are provided on an individual basis on the request of any member of the editorial board. On request of expert boards, prepared and archived reviews may be submitted to the State Higher Attestation Commission of Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.
16. Manuscripts, rejected after reviewing, are not examined for the second time. Other articles of the authors of rejected manuscripts are accepted for consideration without special preferences.
17. In case of a negative assessment of the reviewed material and recommendations of inexpediency of publication in the journal, the reviewers give a detailed argumentation of their conclusions.
18. In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer, the author has the right to appeal to the editorial board with a reasoned request to send his manuscript for reviewing to another reviewer. In this case, the editorial board sends the manuscript for additional review or provides the author with a reasoned refusal.
19. Manuscripts previously published in other scientific journals are not accepted.