The Peer Review Policy for Article Publication in the “Rocket-Space Device Engineering and Information Systems” Journal
- All manuscripts submitted to the Editorial Team are subject to mandatory peer review.
- The Executive Secretary determines whether the manuscript conforms to the specialization of the Journal, format requirements and sends it for review to a Doctor or Candidate of Science in a field related to the topic of the manuscript, whose articles on the topic of the manuscript have been published over the past three years.
- The time frame for peer review is determined individually in order to ensure timely article publication, but should not exceed a one month period.
- The review covers the following points:
- correspondence of the manuscript content to the topic stated in the title;
- advisability of article publication considering previously published articles;
- agreement with modern science;
- intelligibility to readers in terms of language, style, layout, and explicitness of tables, diagrams, figures, and formulas;
- specific positive and negative aspects of the article, corrections and additions that should be made by the author;
- correspondence of the subject matter of the article to the scientific code according to the Nomenclature of scientific specialties.
The concluding part of the referee report should contain a clear recommendation for manuscript publication without changes or recommendations to introduce certain corrections or to revise the manuscript (with constructive remarks), as well as comments on whether or not the manuscript is fit for publication in the Journal.
- The referee’s signature on the text of the review should be authenticated by the seal of the organization where the referee is employed.
- The review process is confidential. The authors of the manuscripts are given the opportunity to become familiar with the text of the review. Confidentiality compromise (disclosure) is only possible under the circumstances when the referee claims the materials presented in the manuscript to be untrustworthy or falsified.
- If certain changes (corrections, revision) to the manuscript are recommended in the review, the Executive Secretary sends the review to the author with a proposal to address the aforementioned recommendations when preparing a new variant of the manuscript or to explicitly justify (in part or in whole) their rejection of changes. The manuscript revised by the author will be sent in for review once more.
- Manuscripts not recommended for publication by the expert referee will not be accepted a second time.
- Once correction and a positive decision on publishing the manuscript have been made, the author will be informed of it by the Executive Secretary of the Editorial Board who will also indicate the publication date. The text of the review will be sent to the author by e-mail.
- The originals of the reviews are stored in the editorial house for five years.