Peer review

The procedure for reviewing articles sent to the editorial office of the reviewed publication "Sretensky Slovo".

1. The author of the article sends his text to the editorial office of the journal by e-mail journal@sdamp.ru or by mail 107031, Moscow, B. Lubyanka str., 19, p. 3.
2. The article is registered and, after initial review by the executive secretary of the editorial office for compliance the subject of the journal is sent for verification to the Anti-Plagiarism system.
3. If a result with originality above 70% is obtained, the editor-in-chief of the journal determines whether the article corresponds to the profile of the journal, the design requirements and, if there is the necessary compliance, sends it to the head of the relevant department of the journal or directly to two specialists (doctors or candidates of sciences) who have the scientific specialization closest to the topic of the article, removing it from the the reviewed article mentions the author and related personal information (address, status, place of work, etc.).
4. Reviewers are informed that the manuscripts sent to them for examination are subject to copyright rules and the content of the articles is not subject to disclosure.
5. The review period may not exceed 30 calendar days.
6. An assessment should be made in the review of the article: 1) the problematic nature, relevance, originality of the work, 2) scientific quality, 3) the style and linguistic features of the article. In conclusion, the reviewer makes a reasoned conclusion about the possibility of publication (with or without revision) and, if necessary, makes recommendations for revision.
7. The author of the article is provided with information about the reviewer's conclusions and recommendations for revision are given without specifying the name of the reviewer.
8. If two positive reviews come from two experts after verification, then the article is accepted for publication.
9. If positive reviews indicate comments to be eliminated, the editorial board eliminates them in cooperation with the author.
10. If one of the reviews is positive and the second is negative, the editorial board sends the article for additional review to a new specialist and, depending on his assessment, makes a final decision on the publication of the article.
11. In case of receiving two negative reviews, the publication of the article is rejected.
12. In case of refusal to review the manuscript submitted by the author, the editorial board sends the author a reasoned response.
13. Anonymized copies of reviews or reasoned explanations are sent to the authors of the articles.
14. Reviews of the received materials are stored in the editorial office of the journal for 5 years and are provided upon request by the Higher Attestation Commission or the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.