373 3737535 cultural diversity clipart

Procedure for Review and Peer Evaluation of Manuscripts. Reviewer Responsibilities

Posted in Terra Artis(EN)

All materials submitted for publication in the Terra Artis. Art and Design journal (hereinafter the journal) are peer reviewed.

All materials (research articles,  reviews, etc.) submitted for publication in the journal are subject to preliminary assessment by the publishing editor or Editor-in-Chief of the journal to ensure compliance with the established formal requirements for published materials (topic, permissible size, structure, formatting, keywords and abstract both in Russian and English, list of sources and references, necessary contact information, permissions to publish images, etc.) and to check that no unauthorised borrowings of text, illustrations, tables, etc. are to be found in the manuscript.

If the article is submitted by a PhD student (or a master’s student), a review-recommendation by their academic advisor must be attached, indicating the advisor's academic degree, academic title, position, place of work, and contact information and certified with the advisor's signature and the organisation's seal.

In case the submitted material is rejected based on the results of the preliminary review, the author will be sent a written notification.

All materials that are not rejected following the preliminary review are subject to mandatory independent scientific peer review either by a specialist with the closest scientific specialisation to the article's topic and holding a candidate’s or doctoral degree, or by a practitioner with experience and professional recognition in a field that is as close as possible to the topic of the material. All reviewers should have scientific articles related to the field of the topic of the reviewed material and published in the last 3 years.

Peer reviews can be conducted by external experts and the members of the journal's Editorial Board, provided there is no conflict of interest (such as author-reviewer hierarchical relationships, academic supervision/co-authorship, etc.).

The peer review is double-blind.  The authors’ identities are not disclosed to the reviewers. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the individual reviewer, the reviewers’ identities are not disclosed to the authors.

The decision to appoint a reviewer is made by the publishing editor or the Editor-in-Chief of the journal.

Peer reviewing voluntary and unpaid. The reviewer can choose to decline the review request, but must notify the editorial office within 5 days of receiving the article.

Peer review of research manuscripts should enable the reviewers to provide substantiated answers to the following questions:

1) Does the content of the article correspond to the topic stated in its title?

2) What constitutes the academic novelty (originality) of the material (if any)?

3) What constitutes the informational novelty (originality) of the material (if any)?

4) How does the reviewed material relate to the existing literature and contemporary research on the relevant subject matter (whether it was taken into account, used, borrowed, compiled, etc.)?

5) Are there any signs of unauthorised borrowing or other violations of research ethics by the author in the material?

6) What constitutes the practical significance of the material (if any)?

7) Is the material presented in a clear manner? Does it follow the general and specific requirements for the structure of the publication, language and style of presentation, terminology used, clarity of tables, diagrams, figures, and formulas, correct formatting of endnotes, and the accuracy of the bibliography, etc.?

8) How accurately are digital data used, how are calculations made, etc.?

9) Is the reviewed material of interest to the journal's readers (if so, why)?

Following the peer review, the reviewer must provide one of the following recommendations:

1) A recommendation for publication of the material as such (unconditionally).

2) A recommendation for publication of the material offering the author to consider the reviewers’ comments and suggestions and make improvements (at the author's discretion)

3) A recommendation to reject the submitted material with the right to resubmit.

4) A recommendation to reject the submitted material without the right to resubmit.

Peer review time is 2 weeks for an article.

The journal's Editorial Board is required to ensure that the reviewers maintain the confidentiality of any information about the research manuscript submitted for review. Reviewers commit to keep confidential the existence of the work and its content, any information about the author that becomes known to them, etc.

The text of the review must not include any form of indirect discussion of the author's identity (such as assumptions about their professional and social status, nationality, race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, citizenship, or political stance).

If a conflict of interest is suspected, the reviewer must notify the editorial office within 10 days of receiving the article.

Reviewers are not allowed to discuss the manuscript being reviewed with any third party. Prior to the publication of the material, reviewers are not entitled to making use of or referring to the reviewed materials.

All reviews conducted by members of the editorial board are certified by the publisher, while reviews conducted by external reviewers are certified according to the procedures established at the institution where the reviewer works.

If the review contains recommendations for corrections and revisions to the article, the journal’s publishing editor sends the reviewer's comments to the author, along with a suggestion to consider them in preparing a new version of the article or to provide a reasoned rebuttal (partialor full). The article revised (reworked) by the author is then sent back for re-review.

If an article is not recommended for publication by the reviewer, it is not accepted for re-review. The negative peer review is sent to the author via email.

Receiving a positive peer review is not a sufficient basis for publication.

The editorial board has the right to provide research and literary editing of articles recommended for publication if agreed by the author(s).

The final decision about the advisability of publication is made by the journal's Editorial Board and is recorded in the minutes of the meeting of the Editorial Board.

There is no fee for publishing articles. Articles are published on a non-remunerative basis.

The originals of peer reviews are kept at the journal's editorial office for a period of 5 years from the date of publication of the material or from the date of the decision to reject the manuscript.

The journal’s editorial office sends copies of reviews or rejection letters to the authors, and will send copies of reviews to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation upon request.