Rules of peer-review

The order of reviewing articles

All articles received by the editorial board of the magazine «Lakokrasochnie materialy i ikh primenenie» (Russia Coatings Journal) are peer-reviewed.

1.      The manuscript of a scientific paper, received by the editorial office of the magazine «Lakokrasochnie materialy i ikh primenenie» (Russia Coatings Journal), is considered by the executive secretary for compliance with the profile of the journal and the requirements and registered. Executive secretary shall send the article for review to one or, if necessary, two peer reviewers.

2.      Reviewing is carried out by members of the Editorial Board. If necessary, leading Russian scientists and experts can be involved in reviewing.

3.      Reviewer(s) are notified that the manuscripts are the intellectual property of the author(s) and are not subject to disclosure. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of articles for their needs. Peer review shall be done confidentially. Breach of confidentiality is possible only if the reviewer will declare about unreliability or falsification of material in the article. Professionals working in the same institution where the scientific work was carried out are not involved in reviewing .

4.      Copies of the reviews are send to the author(s). The originals are stored by the editorial board for 5 (five) years from the date of publication and are provided to the experts on the written request stating the intended purpose and use of the material.

5.      If the review has identified a need for adjustment, the article is sent to the author(s) for revision. The modified article must be returned to the editorial board within a month. The letter from the author(s) must be enclosed to the modified article. This letter must contain answers to all remarks and explaining all changes made in the article. In this case, the receipt date is the date of return the modified article.

6.       If the article has undergone the considerable author's (') remarking it is sent for the second reviewing. The Editorial Board reserves the right to choose the reviewer for repeated reviewing.

7.      The editors reserve theright to reject articles in case of  the inability or unwillingness of the author to take into account the recommendations of editor and reviewer.

8.      The editors reserve the right to remove article from consideration if after the second review the drawbacks noted in the review are not corrected by the author(s). In case of motivated disagreement of the author(s) with opinion of the reviewer the question on article publication solves editorial board of the magazine.

9.      The decision on expediency of the publication after reviewing is accepted by the editor-in-chief, and if necessary, the editorial board

10.  ExecutiveSecretary inform authors about publication decision. Maximum period of review between the dates of receipt of the manuscript by the editor and to make editorial board decision is 2 months.

 Rules of Reviewing

The primary goal of reviewing is improvement of quality of materials published in the magazine. The reviewer reveals drawbacks of articles, offers recommendations for their improvement and by that helps editorial board to carry out strict selection of author's articles for the edition. The recommended volume of reviews - 1-2 pages of A4 text. Under the recommendation of the reviewer and the decision of editorial board, the published articles of debatable character may be added by remarks of the reviewer.

Requirements for the content of review

The review should contain answers to following questions:
       a) whether the material presented in the article corresponds to a magazine profile;
       b) are the presented results of researches actual;
       c) whether presented article contains scientific novelty;
       d) whether level of the material stated in article corresponds to modern achievements of science and technology;
       e) whether the received results are correct and significant from the scientific or scientifically-practical point of view;
       f) whether design of article corresponds to the requirements specified by editorial board;
       g) the detailed description of merits and demerits of article.

In a final part of the review by results of article analysis should be given the recommendation of its publication in the present form, or the need for its modification (by remarks) or maybe the inadvisability of its publication in the magazine.

The Editorial Board of the magazine doesn't keep the articles which have been not accepted to the publication. The articles accepted to the publication are not returned.