The review process

Peer Review Process

Procedure for the review and submission of articles to the academic journal
“Proceedings of the Kyiv Aviation Institute. Series: Philosophy. Culturology”

  1. These regulations govern the procedure for the submission and peer review of articles submitted to the editorial office of the peer-reviewed academic journal “Proceedings of the Kyiv Aviation Institute. Series: Philosophy. Culturology”.
  2. The purpose of peer review is to improve the quality of scholarly articles published in the journal through the evaluation of submitted materials by highly qualified experts.
  3. The peer-review process is anonymous for both reviewers and authors and is conducted by independent reviewers (blind review).
  4. All reviewers must comply with the principles of publication ethics and must remain objective and impartial.
  5. Only scholarly articles prepared in strict accordance with the Author Guidelines and having passed the initial editorial screening are admitted to peer review.
  6. If the above requirements are met, the manuscript is forwarded to the Technical Editor.
  7. The Technical Editor assigns the manuscript a registration code and removes all information identifying the author(s) (manuscript anonymization).
  8. The anonymized manuscript is sent by e-mail to a member of the Editorial Board responsible for the relevant academic field covered by the article.
  9. The Editorial Board member who receives the anonymized manuscript completes the standard review form (see below) and selects one of the following recommendations: recommended for publication; recommended for revision; not recommended for publication.
  10. In the event of rejection or the need for revision, the reviewer must provide a written and reasoned explanation of the grounds for such a decision.
  11. The review recommendations must be prepared within three weeks of receipt of the manuscript.
  12. Reviewers’ recommendations are sent by e-mail to the Executive Secretary.
  13. The final decision on the manuscript is made at a meeting of the Editorial Board. The decision is taken with due regard to the reviewers’ recommendations.
  14. The editorial decision is communicated to the author(s). Manuscripts requiring revision are returned to the author(s) together with the review text containing specific recommendations for revision. Reviewer anonymity is guaranteed by the journal.
  15. A revised version of the manuscript is submitted for re-review. If the second review is also negative, the manuscript is rejected and will not be considered further.
  16. The Editorial Board does not enter into correspondence with the authors of rejected manuscripts.

REVIEWER EVALUATION FORM

 

«Proceedings of the Kyiv Aviation Institute. Series: Philosophy. Culturology» № ___

Date: __________________

Title of the article: _______________________________________________

Compliance with Formal and Content Requirements
(Please mark with “+” where appropriate)

Criteria Yes No Additional Comments
Compliance with the journal’s scope      
Originality      
Scientific novelty      
Practical significance      
The topic’s relevance to the current research      
The topic’s consistency with the publication theme & title      
Methods & Methodology      
Clarity of argument      
Clarity of Presentation      
Style, language, terminology and concepts      
Quality of translation into foreign languages      
Compliance with the journal’s technical requirements      
Abstracts are informative and substantive      
General comment, remark

Final Recommendation
(Please mark with “+” where appropriate)

Accept as is   
Requires minor revisions  
Reject Since it is out of Journal Scope  
Reject Since it requires major revision  
Reject on grounds of (Please be specific)