Review process
The papers sent for the publication in "Modern Historical and Political Issues" are subject to the compulsory review process.
1. The author provides an article to the editorial board; the article should meet the requirements of the publications ethics of the journal "Modern Historical and Political Issues" and the rules of the preparation of articles and scientific papers before publication. Manuscripts that do not meet the adopted requirements are not accepted for further consideration. Within 2 weeks of the submission of the paper, the author reports that he (she) has been admitted to the review process or has not admitted due to non-compliance with the requirements for the design of the paper.
2. All manuscripts submitted to the Editorial Board are directed according to the profile of research to a reviewer. The chief editor of "History Journal of Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University" assigns reviewers. Under certain circumstances reviewers can be assigned at the meeting of the Editorial Board by its members.
3. For reviewing articles as reviewers may act both members of the Editorial Board of the scientific journal "History Journal of Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University" and foreign top-qualified professionals who have profound professional knowledge and experience in a particular scientific direction.
4. After receipt of article for review reviewer evaluates the possibility of reviewing materials based on his own skills under the direction of the author and the absence of any conflict of interest. If there are any competing interests reviewer should not review the article and should inform the Editorial Board about this. The latter should decide to appoint another reviewer.
5. Reviewer usually concludes the possibility of printing the article. Terms of review depend in each case on conditions for the most objective evaluation of quality of materials.
6. Reviewing is held in confidence by the principles of double-blind reviewing (two-way “blind” review, when neither the author nor the reviewer know each other). The interaction between the author and reviewers occurs (in a way of correspondence by e-mail) through the executive secretary of the scientific journal. At the request of the reviewer and in agreement with the working group an interaction between the Editorial Board and reviewer can occur in an open mode (such decision is made only if the interaction of openness will improve the style and presentation logic of research material).
7. After the final analysis of the article the reviewer fills out a standardized form, which contains a summary of recommendations.
8. If the reviewer points to the need to make certain corrections in the article, it is sent to the author with the offer to consider the comments in the preparation of an updated version of the article or to refute them reasonably. With a revised article, the author adds the letter, which contains answers to all comments and explains all the changes that were made in the article. Revised version is given to a reviewer again for the decision and preparation of a reasoned conclusion about the publication appropriateness.
9. In case of inconsistency with the reviewer opinion the author is entitled to a reasonable response to the editor of the journal. In this case the article is considered at a meeting of the Working Group of the Editorial Board. Editors may submit an article for additional or new review to another expert. Editorial Board has the right to reject articles in case of the author's failure or unwillingness to consider suggestions and comments of reviewers. At the request of the author the Editorial Board can give the article to another reviewer with mandatory compliance with the principles of double-blind review.
10. The final decision on the expediency of the publication is adopted by the chief editor, and if necessary at the meeting of the Editorial Board. After deciding on the admission of articles for publication executive secretary shall notify the author and indicate the expected date of publication.
11. In the case of a positive decision on the possibility of publishing an article comes to the editorial magazine portfolio for its publication in the order of turn and relevance (in some cases, by the decision of the Editorial Board, the article may be published out of turn, in the nearest issue).
12. The date of acceptance of articles for publication is the date of a positive opinion by editorial reviewer (or the decision of the Editorial Board) about the possibility of publishing an article.
13. The approved for publication article is provided to a technical editor. Minor stylistic or formal corrections which do not affect the content of the article are made by the technical editor without the consent of the author.
14. Responsibility for the validity and independence of the findings, theoretical and practical level of the article is imposed on the author.
In the case of non-observance of the specified rules, the editorial board will not consider the submitted manuscript.
The editorial board reserves the right to technically reduce and edit manuscripts.
