Peer-review policy

How the manuscripts submitted to the journal "Society and Economy" are reviewed

1. The review can be carried out either by internal reviewers from among the members of the Editorial Board or by external reviewers from research institutions, universities and government agencies.

All articles submitted to the editorial board of the “Society and Economy” undergo a mandatory double-blind reviewing (the reviewer does not know the author of the manuscript, the author of the manuscript do not know the reviewer).

External reviewers are chosen from experts on the issues covered by the submitted articles, provided they have scientific publications in the same field.

In cases of dispute, two experts should be asked to independently review the materials.

2. The Editorial Board may not agree with the opinion of the reviewers, and in these cases will take its own appropriately substantiated decision.

The editors, in consultation with members of the Editorial Board, select the most informative articles from among those approved by reviewers, considering the limited space in the journal. The final decision on the advisability of publication is made by the Chief Editor, taking into account the reviews received and other expert opinions.

If necessary, the question of the advisability of publication is considered at a meeting of the Editorial Board or by interviewing its members.

3. The Editorial Board and editors do not enter into discussions with the authors of the submitted materials about the comments made and the general conclusion about the advisability of publication. Once rejected, articles are not accepted for reconsideration.

4. At the request of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation reviews must be submitted to the Ministry of Education and / or the Higher Attestation Commission.

5. In case the article needs modifications before publishing, taking into account the comments of the reviewer, the author is sent a letter with recommendations for revising the article, or a copy of the review (at the discretion of the publisher). After revision, the article is reconsidered by the editors or once again sent for a review.

6. In case of rejection, the Editorial Board sends a motivated refusal to the author. The articles that do not fit the profile of the journal are rejected without peer review, the same applies to the articles that duplicate the materials already published or do not contain new information, conclusions or generalizations.

7. The information about the reviewer is confidential and is not reported to the author (unless the consent of the reviewer to contact the author is obtained).

8. The content of the review is communicated to the author in a letter from the head of the editorial office; in this letter the editorial consent or disagreement with the conclusions of the reviewer is reported.

The decision of the Editorial Board, based on the reviews and consultations with experts, is final, and after the author acquaints himself with it, the editorial staff does not enter into further correspondence with the author.