scholarly journals Peer review declaration

2021 ◽  
Vol 2052 (1) ◽  
pp. 011002
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Applied Mathematics ◽  
Program Committee ◽  
Academic Publishing ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
Plagiarism Detection ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Review Procedure ◽  
Peer Review Procedure

The present document contains details on the procedure for reviewing the materials of the third International Scientific and Practical Conference MATHEMATICAL MODELING, PROGRAMMING AND APPLIED MATHEMATICS 2021. • The type of peer review is double blind peer review. • All the submitted materials, timely received by the conference e-mail [email protected], were considered by the program organizing committee. The program committee identified the reviewers who received the authors’ articles through the conference email. Each article was submitted to two independent peer reviewers with a scientific degree who did not know the name of the author (or the names of authors) of the article being reviewed. All articles submitted for consideration have passed the peer review procedure in accordance with the standards of editorial ethics, with international practice of editing, reviewing, publishing and authorship of scientific publications and the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics –COPE. Plagiarism, improper borrowing, attempts to circumvent plagiarism detection, verbatim copying and paraphrasing of one’s own work (self-plagiarism) without proper justification, copyright infringement is considered unacceptable practices. All articles that have passed the peer review procedure are original works that have not been previously published in other publications in their current or similar form; they have not been reviewed in other editions. Materials of low scientific level are not accepted for publication. • The number of applications received is 105, of which 59 were accepted for work, the acceptance rate (number of applications accepted / number of applications received X 100) was 56%. • Average number of reviews per paper - 1,6. • The total number of reviewers involved is 40 experts in this particular subject area. • Additional information on the process of consideration of materials: only applications, the authors of which had corrected the substantiated comments of the reviewers, were accepted; the articles that received a negative review from the reviewer were excluded from the conference materials. The conference materials submission control system is presented on the official conference website at https://www.novsu.ru/dept/515278/i.454744/?id=1759423. • For inquiries please contact Dr. Oxana Fikhtner, Head of Academic Publishing Development centre of NovSU ([email protected]).

scholarly journals Volume 9, Issue 2, Formation

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hayder A. L. Mossa ◽  
◽  
Taif Alawsi ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Ethical Code ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Creative Commons ◽  
Peer Reviewing ◽  
Review Procedure ◽  
Near Future ◽  
Peer Review Procedure

The editors of the Iraqi Journal of Embryos and Infertility Researches (IJEIR) are thankful to the huge efforts made by the reviewers in peer- reviewing the submitted manuscripts. Thanks to their efforts the second issue of the 9th volume is now available online with open access to the articles content. We are looking forward in inclusion in relevant indexing in the near future. We would like to acknowledge the reviewers for their contribution, and we wish them the greatest success. We ensured the anonymity of both reviewers and authors and followed a double-blind peer-review procedure. Our published articles are under the creative common attribution license. We strictly followed the COPE ethical code in the published studies. Our articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

scholarly journals Volume 10, Issue 2, Formation

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e1-e15
Author(s):  
Taif Alawsi ◽  
Ula Al-Kawaz
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Online System ◽  
Creative Commons ◽  
Peer Reviewing ◽  
Review Procedure ◽  
Near Future ◽  
Peer Review Procedure

In editors of the Iraqi Journal of Embryos and Infertility Researches (IJEIR) are thankful to the huge efforts made by the reviewers in peer reviewing the submitted manuscripts. Thanks to their efforts the second issue of the 10th volume is now available online with open access to the articles content. We are looking forward in inclusion in relevant indexing in the near future. We would like to acknowledge the reviewers for their contribution, and we wish them the greatest success. We ensured the anonymity of both reviewers and authors and followed a double-blind peer-review procedure. We strictly followed the COPE ethical code in the published studies. As of now, the IJEIR is published in new website https://ijeir.net/index.php/ijeir supported by the Open Journal Systems (OJS), therefore all the activities were strictly by the online system. Journal reviewers were given the proper credit via Publons (an online platform that promotes the peer review process). Currently, IJEIR is indexed in Google Scholar, Science gate, Crossref, Iraqi academic journals, Publons, Dimensions, LOCKSS, and CLOCKSS. Our articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License and the rights are with the authors which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0  

scholarly journals Volume 9, Issue 1, Formation

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e1-e10
Author(s):  
Taif Alawsi ◽  
Hayder A. L. Mossa
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Ethical Code ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Creative Commons ◽  
Review Procedure ◽  
Near Future ◽  
Peer Review Procedure

The editors of the Iraqi Journal of Embryos and Infertility Researches (IJEIR) are thankful to the huge efforts made by the reviewers in peerreviewing the submitted manuscripts. Thanks to their efforts the first issue of the 9th volume is now available online with open access to the articles content. We are looking forward in inclusion in relevant indexing in the near future. We would like to acknowledge the reviewers for their contribution, and we wish them the greatest success. We ensured the anonymity of both reviewers and authors and followed a double-blind peer-review procedure. Our published articles are under the creative common attribution license. We strictly followed the COPE ethical code in the published studies. Our articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

scholarly journals Peer review declaration

2021 ◽  
Vol 2096 (1) ◽  
pp. 011002
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Program Committee ◽  
Practical Significance ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Blind Review ◽  
Conference Theme ◽  
Relevant Field ◽  
Mail Address ◽  
E Mail

Abstract All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series has been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Double-blind • Conference submission management system: 1. Sending materials to the organizers of the conference; 2. Verification of compliance with the subject of the conference; 3. Checking materials for plagiarism using two systems; 4. Submitting for double blind review; 5. Checking the quality of translation of the article into English; 6. Checking for the correct design of materials; 7. Submission of materials to the Publisher. • Number of submissions received: 558 • Number of submissions sent for review: 505 • Number of submissions accepted: 252 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 50% • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 118 • Any additional info on review process: To be accepted for publication, the material must have the following requirements: compliance with the conference theme; positive expertise of reviewers; good level of English and well-formed material. The article should have: - the relevance (subject matter of the article should be interest to the scientific community in terms of the current development of science and technology); - the scientific character (the article should deal with considered the scientific aspects of the problem, even if the task itself has a practical bias); - the originality (results that presented in the article should have a scientific novelty, survey articles to be approved by the special decision of The International Program Committee). The article must be clearly structured to be generally accepted in scientific publications sections, namely: - introduction; - relevance, scientific significance of the question with a brief review of the literature; -setting of the problem; - the theoretical part; - practical significance, suggestions and case studies, the results of experiments; - conclusions. The results that presented in this paper must be justified by particular scientific tools: experimental mathematical conclusion, mathematical modeling, etc., in order to be considered them as sufficiently reliable. We do not accept materials containing only a hypothesis or untested proposals. The presented results should be formulated in the form of scientific statements, which clearly define a contribution to science. The article should be written in an understandable language for an expert in the relevant field. Generally accepted technical terms should be used. The manuscripts should contain the following information: - paper title; - author(s) data (name, title, affiliation, full mail address, phone and fax numbers, e-mail address); - abstract; - keywords; - references. Contact person for queries: D B Solovev ([email protected])

Volume 10, Issue 1, Formation

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. e1-e10
Author(s):  
Taif Alawsi ◽  
Ula M. R. Al-Kawaz ◽  
Hayder A. L. Mossa
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Ethical Code ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Creative Commons ◽  
Review Procedure ◽  
Near Future ◽  
Peer Review Procedure

The editors of the Iraqi Journal of Embryos and Infertility Researches (IJEIR) are thankful to the huge efforts made by the reviewers in peerreviewing the submitted manuscripts. Thanks to their efforts the first issue of the 9th volume is now available online with open access to the articles content. We are looking forward in inclusion in relevant indexing in the near future. We would like to acknowledge the reviewers for their contribution, and we wish them the greatest success. We ensured the anonymity of both reviewers and authors and followed a double-blind peer-review procedure. Our published articles are under the creative common attribution license. We strictly followed the COPE ethical code in the published studies. Our articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

scholarly journals Peer review declaration

2021 ◽  
Vol 2086 (1) ◽  
pp. 011002
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Management System ◽  
Program Committee ◽  
Acceptance Rate ◽  
Contact Person ◽  
Conference Series ◽  
Review Procedure ◽  
Peer Review Procedure

• Type of peer review: closed, collective. At the first stage, candidates sent their short abstracts when registering on the conference website. Totally, 483 candidates have been registered. The Program Committee pre-selected the submitted abstracts on the basis of the peer review procedure with the involvement of external experts. 286 selected participants were admitted to the conference. Upon the end of the conference, the participants sent in extended versions of their works in the format required for publication in the Journal of Physics: Conference Series. The program committee finally selected 221 articles for publication in the Journal of Physics: Conference Series. • Conference submission management system: Articles were downloaded through the conference website. • Number of submissions received: 483 • Number of submissions sent for review: 483 • Number of submissions accepted: 221 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 46 • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 10 • Contact person for queries: Prof. Alexey E. Zhukov, HSE – St Petersburg, 3(1) Kantemirovskaya str, St Petersburg, 194100, Russia [email protected]

The peer review procedure: some thoughts on the analysis and dissemination of good practices in the framework of the European Employment Strategy

2006 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 333-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florence Lefresne
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Good Practices ◽  
Mutual Learning ◽  
Community Model ◽  
Review Procedure ◽  
Peer Review Procedure

The purpose of the peer review programme - created in 1999, and in 2005 incorporated into the mutual learning programme of the European Employment Strategy - is to identify and evaluate good practices by Member States and to promote their transferability within the European Union. But is it possible to isolate a good practice and to transpose it? On the basis of specific examples this article draws attention to the numerous inconsistencies that emerge between the supposedly universal register of the EES and the great variety of national registers through which it is interpreted. These findings lead to an adjustment of the expectations placed in mutual learning. The article goes on to show that the identification of good practices reflects, in considerable measure, a wish on the part of the Member States to make their national employment policies appear legitimate, implicitly raising, at the same time, some questions about the actual feasibility of a Community model.

scholarly journals Rejection rate and reasons for rejection after peer review: a case study of a Russian economics journal

2021 ◽  
Vol 47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evgueniya A Balyakina ◽  
Ludmila A Kriventsova
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Scientific Journal ◽  
Rejection Rate ◽  
Research Area ◽  
Editorial Team ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Blind Review ◽  
Review Reports

 Background:  Peer review remains the only way of filtering and improving research. However, there are few studies of peer review based on the contents of review reports, because access to these reports is limited. Objectives: To measure the rejection rate and to investigate the reasons for rejection after peer-review in a specialized scientific journal.  Methods:  We considered the manuscripts submitted to a Russian journal, namely ‘Economy of Region’ (Rus Экономика региона), from 2016 to 2018, and analysed the double-blind review reports related to rejected submissions in qualitative and quantitative terms including descriptive statistics. Results: Of the 1653 submissions from 2016 to 2018, 324 (20%) were published, giving an average rejection rate of 80%. Content analysis of reviewer reports showed five categories of shortcomings in the manuscripts: breaches of publication ethics, mismatch with the journal’s research area, weak research reporting (a major group, which accounted for 66%of the total); lack of novelty, and design errors. We identified two major problems in the peer-review process that require editorial correction: in 36% of the cases, the authors did not send the revised version of the manuscript to the journal after receiving editorial comments and in 30% of the cases, the reviewers made contradictory recommendations. Conclusions: To obtain a more balanced evaluation from experts and to avoid paper losses the editorial team should revise the journal’s instructions to authors, its guide to reviewers, and the form of the reviewer’s report by indicating the weightings assigned to the different criteria and by describing in detail the criteria for a good paper.

scholarly journals Ewolucyjna transformacja czasopisma. Część 4

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. 5-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michał Kokowski ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
History Of Science ◽  
Review Procedure ◽  
History Of ◽  
Peer Review Procedure

The article presents the fourth phase of the development of the journal Studia Historiae Scientiarum (previous name Prace Komisji Historii Nauki PAU / Proceedings of the PAU Commission on the History of Science). The sections of the journal were modified, as well as the peer review procedure and the bibliographic style. There has also been an increase in the number of foreign authors and reviewers of the journal.

scholarly journals Introducing the 1st Issue of the Nicholai Studies

2021 ◽  
Vol I (1) ◽  
pp. 7-16
Author(s):  
Srećko Petrović
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Internal Review

With the first issue of the new international journal dedicated to the research of Bishop Nicholai Velimirovich’s legacy, the circumstances and the context in which he lived and created, and the issues of reception of his ideas and his contribution, we would like to say a word on the main editorial and publishing policies. We fully endorse academic rules on publishing and publication ethics. Our journal is published both in English and Serbian language; we apply the double-blind unbiased peer-review, including internal review by the Editorial Board and external reviewers, experts on the topic.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document