Reviewing helps the Editor to decide on a publication and can help the author to improve the quality of the work. Reviewers should not be involved in reviewing manuscripts in the event of conflicts of interest as a result of competitive, collaborative or other interactions and relationships with any of the authors, companies or other organizations associated with the work submitted. The reviewer should objectively evaluate the quality of the manuscript, the theoretical work presented, its interpretation and presentation and also the reviewer should consider high scientific and literary work standards. The reviewer must respect the intellectual independence of authors. A reviewer should consider the possibility of the conflict of interest when a particular manuscript is closely related to the current or published work of the reviewer. If in doubt, the reviewer should immediately return the manuscript without review, indicating the conflict of interest. A reviewer should not evaluate a manuscript if the author or co-author has personal or professional connections with him, and in case if such relationships may affect the manuscript's judgment. Each manuscript, received for review, should be treated as a confidential document, with the exception of the cases where the reviewer is required a special advice.
Reviewers should adequately explain and argue in favour of their opinions so that editors and authors can understand the ground of author’s ideas. The reviewer should draw the editor's attention to any significant similarity between this manuscript and any published article or any manuscript submitted to another journal at the same time. The reviewer is obliged to give an objective assessment. The personal criticism of the author is unacceptable, the reviewers should express their opinion clearly and reasonably. Reviewers should identify significant published works relevant to the topic and not included in the manuscript.
The reviewer must provide feedback in a timely manner. Unpublished data, obtained from submitted manuscripts, may not be used in personal research without the written consent of the author. The information or ideas received during the review and related to the potential benefits should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
The reviewer must fill in a timely email to submit a review of the article in the appropriate form.
The reviewer fills in a questionnaire assessing the following:
- relevance of the article on the topic of Social Law;
- correspondence of the title, annotation, keywords, UDC code of the article content;
- the presence of elements of scientific novelty;
- adequacy and sufficiency of the methods used;
- compliance of the article structure with the requirements for materials published in professional publications;
- the degree of disclosure of the main results of the study in the English abstract of the article;
- compliance of the text of the article and the sources used with the requirements of Social Law;
- the volume of the article;
- the scientific language of the author;
- general literacy of teaching material.
The article review form can be obtained from the link. - (reviewer survey)