1. Manuscripts received by the editors of the journal «The Humanities and Education» («Gumanitarnye Nauki i Obrazovanie») are subject to mandatory review. Reviewing of the materials submitted to the journal «The Humanities and Education» («Gumanitarnye Nauki i Obrazovanie») is done confidentially, the name of the reviewer(s) is not reported to the author(s) (one-way (blind) review).
2. Reviewing (peer-review) of manuscripts of scientific articles in journal «The Humanities and Education» («Gumanitarnye Nauki i Obrazovanie»)is done to maintain a high theoretical and scientific level of publications and for the selection of the most valuable and relevant (prospective) research papers.
3. Primary reviewing (peer-review) is available on request of the editor in chief, the deputy editor in chief and the executive secretary of the journal.
4. Reviewing (peer-review) is carried out by the members of the editorial board, members of the expert council and/or other competent scientists, collaborating with the journal’s editors. Supervisors, except for the members of the editorial board, as a rule, can not act as reviewers of the manuscripts of their disciples. Reviewers are notified that the materials sent to them are the private property of the authors and contain information not be disclosed. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies and pass the materials to third parties. Review is signed by the original signature of the reviewer.
5. The reviewer is to provide an expert opinion in the time limit agreed with the editors, but as a rule, within one month after receiving of the manuscript.
6. In the review (peer review), as a rule, there should be briefly assessed:
— the general level of scientific work;
— name and its compliance with the contents of the article;
— relevance of the topic;
— scientific novelty, theoretical and practical significance of the findings;
— structure of the work;
— presence in the work of controversial and/or incorrect positions;
— compliance with the reader’s interest;
and also the reviewer (expert) opinion about the possibility or impossibility of publishing the manuscript:
— in the author’s version;
— after scientific and/or literary editing;
— after revision of manuscript (with a list of comments);
— after in-depth editing of the manuscript and additional reviewing (indicating principal directions of revision).
7. In case of positive decision of reviewers a manuscript is returned to the editors for publication in one of the issues. If the review (peer-review) or recommendation contains significant observations and conclusions to rework the article, the manuscript is returned to the author for removal of comments. If necessary, a manuscript can be re-reviewed by other expert(s), including the decision of the majority of the members of the editorial board. Reasons for re-review are:
— stated by the expert(s) insufficient qualifications in matters dealt with in the manuscript;
— insufficient level of initial expert opinion;
— controversial nature of theses of the manuscript .
In case of repeated negative result of reviewing the manuscript is rejected and not subjected to further review. The Editorial Board sends the author(s) motivated refusal with reviews without specifying the names of the reviewer(s).
The final decision on the recommendation of the manuscript for publication or rejection of publication is adopted at a meeting of the Editorial Board of a simple majority.
8. Editors keep records of manuscript reviewing procedures (peer review).
9. Contents of review (peer review) shall be notified to the author(s) usually within a week after receiving of the expert conclusion by the Editorial Board.
10. Reviews (peer-review) of the manuscript are to be stored in a thematic series of the Editorial Board for 5 years from the date of publication of articles and presented at the request of expert councils of High Attestation Commission of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.