The procedure for reviewing manuscripts of articles in Customs Scientific Journal
Reviewing (peer review) of manuscripts of scientific articles is carried out in order to maintain a high scientific and theoretical level of the "Customs Scientific Journal" and to select the most valuable and up-to-date scientific works.
Two-sided, blind (anonymous) peer review was applied in "Customs Scientific Journal": the reviewer does not disclose the personal data of the author / authors; author / authors are not disclosed to the reviewer.
The edited scientific papers are subject to primary control over compliance with the requirements of the scientific article.
The initial expert evaluation of a scientific article is carried out by the editor-in-chief or the deputy editor-in-chief.
The editorial board defines a reviewer from a member of the editorial board who oversees the relevant scientific field for the article submitted for publication.
In the absence of a curator of the relevant direction, the editorial board appoints an external reviewer for this work.
Reviewers (both editorial board members and external reviewers) should be well-known specialists in the subject of the submitted manuscript and have publications in the field of research (preferably in the last 5 years).
After evaluating the scientific article, the reviewer concludes:
- article recommended for publication;
- the article is recommended for publication after its revision by the author, taking into account the comments made;
- article not recommended for publication.
If the reviewer recommends the article for publication after its revision, taking into account the comments, or does not recommend the article for publication, the review should state the reason for the decision.
The editorial board recommends that you use the standard review form developed by the editorial board for review.
When reviewing scientific articles, reviewers should:
- pay particular attention to the relevance of the scientific issue raised in the article;
- evaluate how the author's findings relate to existing scientific concepts;
- to evaluate the authors' adherence to the rules of scientific ethics, the correctness of references to literary sources.
Scientific articles may be referred for additional peer review. Reasons for re-reviewing may be:
- not enough high level of primary expert opinion;
- sharp discussion of the provisions expressed in the scientific article.
