Procedure for reviewing manuscripts submitted to the Issues of Politology review

All articles submitted to the editorial board shall be obligatory reviewed. All articles shall be reviewed by PhDs or DCs specializing in the topics, raised in the article. No author or co-author of the article may review it.

When submitting an article to be published in the review, the author shall also submit a review in the paper form authenticated by a stamp from the reviewer’s place of employment.

When a manuscript is submitted to the editorial board, it shall be directed to the member of the editorial board who specializes in the topic of the article.

The reviews shall be discussed by the editorial board and such discussion serves as the basis for accepting or rejecting the manuscript. When signing his/her review, the reviewer shall specify his/her family name, name and patronymics, date, academic rank, academic title and place of employment.

The review shall objectively evaluate the academic article and contain an all-round analysis of its academic and methodological merits and drawbacks. Any review shall obligatory contain the following points.

Obligatory points to be covered in any review:

- whether the article is topical or not;

- academic novelty of the research direction considered in the article;

- importance of the results obtained by the author for further development of the theory and practice in the given area of knowledge;

- quality of presentation: style, terminology, wordings.

In the end, the review shall contain well-grounded conclusions regarding the manuscript in general and a clear recommendation as to the expediency of its publication or the necessity to amend it.

In case the manuscript does not correspond to one or several criteria, the reviewer shall note in his/her review that the article shall be amended and give recommendations to the author as to how it may be improved (specifying errors or inaccuracies made by the author). The editorial board shall inform the author of the results of reviewing. Articles amended by the author shall be repeatedly sent for reviewing to the same reviewer who wrote critical comments or to another one, at the discretion of the editorial board.

If the author does not agree with the reviewer’s comments, he/she may request that his/her article be reviewed by another reviewer or withdraw his/her article.

The final decision as to the expediency of the publication of the article after it has been reviewed is taken by the editorial board.

The editorial board does not keep manuscripts that are not accepted for publication. Manuscripts accepted for publication shall not be returned.

N.P. Medvedev, Editor-in Chief