INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES

All scientific articles submitted to be published in «INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES» which successfully passed the check for compliance with the technical design and anti-plagiarism are sent by the editor-in-chief to the reviewers (with the result of checking attached). Articles undergo mandatory double-blind peer review (the names of the authors of the article are unknown to the reviewers, and the names of the reviewers are unknown to the authors of the article).

  A member of the editorial board responsible for scientific directions sends the article through the online system of the website of the journals to two independent scholars- reviewers on the relevant topic or areas close to the research topic (without specifying information about the article’s authors). At that, members of the editorial board cannot be reviewers. Reviewers are involved specialists registered on the website of the journals in the reviewers' database. The reviewer should certify the review with the seal of the institution he/she works at. Depending on each individual case, the review period is determined by the editorial staff.
Responsibility for the quality of the review and the timeliness of reviewing the manuscript of the article rests with the executive editor.

The review is carried out confidentially. Reviewers should be aware that the manuscripts sent to them are the intellectual property of the authors and refer to information that is not subject to disclosure. Violation of confidentiality is possible only if the reviewer claims that the materials contained in the manuscript are unreliable or falsified. Each reviewer has the right to refuse reviewing if he finds an open conflict of interest arising from the understanding and interpretation of information in the manuscript.

In case if the review contains recommendations for correcting and revising the article, Executive editor sends the text of the review to the author (without specifying the reviewer) with a proposal to introduce the proposed changes into the article or to reasonably refute them (partially or completely). The article, revised by the author, is resent for reviewing to the same reviewer who made the critical remarks.

An article not recommended by the reviewer for publication will not be accepted for reconsideration. Positive review is not a sufficient reason for the publication of an article as well. The final decision on the expediency of publication is made by the Editor-in-chief, Executive editor and Scientific editor.

The following articles are not accepted for publication:
 the articles not designed in accordance with the requirements, if the authors refuse to revise articles technically;
 the articles of the authors who do not fulfill the constructive comments of the reviewer or not refute their arguments.
 articles that have not passed the plagiarism check and have low originality scores;
 articles that do not contain scientific novelty, and do not reflect scientific methods and the results of processing sources.

Review

For master's and doctoral students, it is required to provide a review by a supervisor recommending the article for publication (this is not required for authors with an academic degree). Instead of a review from a scientific consultant or supervisor, a review from a leading expert on the topic, or a decision from the Academic Council of the institution where the article was written can be provided. All reviews should be submitted electronically in Word format along with the original document, certified by the signature and seal of the organization in which the work was performed in scanned form. Volume up to 0.5 pages.

The review must contain a qualified analysis of the manuscript – an objective, reasoned assessment and recommendations for publication in the open press. Reviewers evaluate articles in a prescribed form according to a number of criteria, including: the clarity of the wording of the title of the article, the relevance of the topic, its priority for the journal, the interest of specialists and the general reader in it; compliance of the content of the article with the profile and scientific requirements of the journal; the nature of the article (fundamental, interdisciplinary, applied, review, abstract); scientific novelty of the problem statement and its solution; usefulness for practical implementation, conclusions, recommendations; reliance on authoritative sources, scientific literature; use of the results of empirical research (including those carried out exclusively by the author); the language and style of the article, its research value; methods used by the author and research results, compliance of proposals with modern scientific achievements; the volume of the article as a whole and its rationality (text, illustrative material, bibliographic references), the need to place illustrative material and its compliance with the content of the topic; the place of the reviewed manuscript in historiography (repetition of previously published works by other authors or the author of the article); if the author made factual errors and falsifications; taking into account the requirements of the journal for the design of the article, preparation of abstracts and keywords, and a list of references.

The reviewer's comments and suggestions should be objective and aim at improving the quality of the manuscript.

The final part of the review should contain substantiated conclusions about the article as a whole and a clear, reasoned recommendation on the advisability or inappropriateness of its publication:
– the article is recommended for publication in its present form;
– the article is recommended for publication after correction of the shortcomings noted by the reviewer;
– the article needs additional review by another specialist;
– the article cannot be published in the journal.
The time of receipt of the article by the editor is taken into account when determining the priority of its publication.

The average period for reviewing an article manuscript is 1 month.