In order to comply with the principles of academic integrity and ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community, a mandatory procedure for reviewing all articles coming to the editorial board of Public Law is carried out. The purpose of peer review is to promote the strict selection of manuscripts for publication.
The review procedure is focused on the most objective assessment of the content of the scientific article, determining its compliance with the requirements of the journal and provides a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the article.
Forms of article reviewing:
- external (peer review of manuscripts by a doctor or candidate of science who is a specialist in the relevant field);
- internal (reviewing manuscripts by members of the editorial board):
1. The external review should cover the following issues:
- the content of the article stated in the title of the topic;
- relevance of the article to current achievements in the specified field;
- accessibility of the article to the readers on whom it is calculated, in terms of language, style, layout of the material, etc .;
- the expediency of publishing an article in the light of previously published literature;
- the positives, as well as the shortcomings of the article, which corrections and additions should be made by the author;
- conclusion about the possibility of publishing this manuscript in the journal.
2. External reviews shall be certified in accordance with the procedure established in the institution where the reviewer works. The review must be signed by the reviewer, indicating the position, academic degree and academic title.
3. Internal review is performed by the members of the editorial board of the journal (the list of members of the editorial board can be found on the website of the publication and on the pages of the printed copy of the magazine).
The magazine uses double-blind reviewing (doubleblind - both do not know about each other).
In addition to the members of the editorial board, other domestic and foreign highly qualified specialists (mostly PhDs, professors) who have thorough knowledge, relevant competence and experience in a specific scientific field may be invited to review articles.
4. Review periods in each case are determined taking into account the creation of conditions for the most prompt publication of the article, but may not exceed three weeks.
5. The reviewer comments on the quality of the manuscript on such points as:
- scientific novelty,
- validity of results,
- the value of the results,
- clarity of teaching,
- quality of design.
6. In accordance with these paragraphs, a decision shall be made as to the expediency of the publication, the necessity of revising the manuscript, or the inappropriate publication.
7. If the article is rejected from the publication, the editorial board shall send the author a reasoned refusal.
8. Articles by eminent scientists as well as specially invited articles may be exempted from the standard review procedure. Articles not authored (co-authored) by editorial board members are not reviewed.
9. The final decision on the expediency of publication shall be made by the Scientific Council of Uzhgorod National University and shall be issued with a decision on the recommendation for publication.
10. The originals of the reviews are kept in the journal.
The manuscripts under review are strictly confidential, so the reviewer does not have to discuss the manuscript or even mention its existence in conversation with third parties. Exceptionally, when a reviewer wants to consult a colleague on a particular issue of a manuscript, he or she will bring it to the attention of the editor.
Reviewers should not use the information obtained for personal, self-serving purposes.