Vestnik RIAT -
Procedure of preparation, reviewing and submission of articles
The Procedure of reviewing of manuscripts of scientific articles
received by the editorial staff of the “Vestnik RIAT” magazine
§1. Arrangement of Reviewing
1.1. All scientific articles received by the editorial office (with due consideration of all the requirements to authors, including availability of one referee report) shall be subject to obligatory additional reviewing.
1.2. The managing editor shall determine the correspondence of the received article manuscript to the magazine’s profile and the requirements to execution of articles.
1.3. The science editor in charge of the relevant scientific area shall send the article for reviewing to an expert – a doctor or candidate of sciences – with a scientific specialty the closest to the article theme as well as the publications on the theme of the reviewing article for the last 3 years.
1.4. The science editor in charge of the relevant scientific area is responsible for the quality of referee reports and the terms of reviewing the manuscripts.
1.5. Time limits for reviewing shall in each individual case be determined by the managing editor or by the science editor in charge of the relevant scientific area.
1.6. For the requirements to the content of reviews, see §2.
1.7. An article shall be provided to a reviewer without indication of any data on the authors. Reviewers may not make copies of manuscripts for their personal needs or transfer a part of a manuscript for reviewing to another person without permission of the editors. Reviewers shall not be entitled to use the knowledge of the content of a work in their interests before publication of the work.
1.8. Reviews shall be certified in accordance with the procedure established in the institution where the reviewer works.
1.9. Reviewing shall be confidential. Reviewers shall be obliged to know that the manuscripts sent to them are intellectual property of the authors and constitute highly confidential information. A breach of confidentiality is possible only if a reviewer declares that the materials contained in the article manuscript are unreliable or falsified.
1.10. The copy of a referee report or motivated reject is sent to the author of the presented papers. If a review contains recommendations on correction and improvement of an article, the science editor shall send to the author the text of the review with a proposal to take them into consideration during preparation of a new version of the article or to contest them (fully or partially) with provision of arguments. The article improved (revised) by the author shall be again sent for reviewing to the reviewer who provided the comments.
1.11. An article not recommended by a reviewer for publication shall not be accepted for reconsideration.
1.12. Availability of a positive review shall not constitute a sufficient warranty for publication of the article. A final decision on the expediency of publication shall be adopted by the editor-in-chief, the managing editor or the science editor in charge of one of the scientific areas. The following articles shall not be acceptable for publishing: a) articles which were not executed in accordance with the established requirements, if their authors refuse from technical improvement of the articles; b) articles whose authors do not comply with the reviewer’s constructive comments or do not contest them with provision of arguments.
1.13. Articles shall be reviewed within 6 months.
1.14. Original reviews shall be kept in the editorial office of the “Vestnik RIAT” magazine for five years.
1.15. The editorial staff shall not keep manuscripts not accepted for publishing. Manuscripts accepted for publication will not be returned.
§2. Requirements to the content of a review
2.1. A review shall contain a qualified analysis of the materials of the article, their objective and well-reasoned assessment and clearly substantiated recommendations.
2.2. In a review, special emphasis shall be placed on covering of the following issues:
– Analysis of the relevance of the topic and of the article’s scientific level.
– Correspondence of the content of the article to its name.
– Assessment of readiness of the article for publication in respect of its language and style, as well as its correspondence to the established requirements to execution of the article’s materials.
– Scientific character of presentation of the materials, correspondence of the methods, recommendations and research results used by the author to the contemporary scientific achievements.
– Adequacy and rationality of the whole article in general and of its separate elements (text, illustrative materials, bibliographical references). The expediency of inclusion into the article of illustrative materials and their correspondence to the addressed topic.
– Place of the reviewed manuscript in historiography: whether the manuscript duplicates works of other authors or works of this author, which were printed earlier (both generally and partially).
– Quality of preparation of the article: the style, terminology and formulations.
2.3. Comments and wishes of the reviewer must be objective, principal and aimed at raising of the manuscript’s scientific level.
2.4. The final part of the review shall contain well-founded conclusions in respect of the article in general and a clear and unambiguous recommendation on the expediency or necessity of its improvement. In case of a negative assessment of the manuscript in general (a recommendation on inexpediency of publication), the reviewer shall substantiate his/her conclusions.
Procedure of preparation and submission of articles
The following shall be submitted to the editorial office:
1. The text of the article, including annotations, images, tables, a reference list, a list of the authors and data on them, prepared on a computer and printed on white paper of the A4 format with a readable and clear font in two copies.
2. An electronic version of the article, prepared on IBM PC in the MS Word for Windows format. Authors from other cities may send the electronic version of the article to the editorial office by e-mail.
3. An expert opinion prepared by a doctor or candidate of sciences, or by an expert in the researched area.
The article shall be signed by all the authors.
Approximate volume of the publication must not exceed 10 pages.
The first page of the article shall be executed in the following way: initials and surname of the author; name of the article; a short (not more than 7 full lines) annotation and key words. All the above-said positions must be in the Russian and in the English languages. Next, the text of the article shall be given.
The materials of the article shall be prepared in the MS Word text editor (6.0 or later versions) and presented in the standard DOC format or in the RTF cross format.
A4 format; the left, right, top and bottom margins shall be 2 cm each. The font shall be Times New Roman of 14 pt. size, with 1.5 interval between the lines.
Numeration of pages is obligatory.
Tables. The names of rows and columns of the table and its title must be short, but without abbreviations. Tables must be obligatorily mentioned in the text.
Illustrations. Vector drawings must be presented in the WMF (Windows Metafile) file format. The text and lines in the image must be editable (the text must not be “in curves”).
Halftone images (photographs) may be presented in the TIFF format (without compression).
MS Word may not be used.
Images must be mentioned in the text and be numbered and entitled.
A reference list shall be given at the end of the article and executed according to the Russian State Standard GOST R 7.0.5-2008 “Bibliographic Reference. General Requirements and Rules of Compilation”; it must contain up to 15 names. Numbers of the sources must be given alphabetically; references must be given in square brackets.
The list of authors with data on them shall be prepared as a separate file.
The following must be indicated: the full surname, given name and patronymic (in the Russian and in the English languages); academic degree, academic title; position; place of work; contact telephone, e-mail.
For postgraduate students, the academic advisor shall be indicated.
| BACK |