Papers submitted to the Editorial Office are subjected to the peer-review process.

All the reviewers are well-known experts in their fields of study which are similar to those of the papers under consideration and have scientific works on these areas published during the last 3 years. The reviews are stored in the Editorial Office for 5 years.

The Editorial Board sends to the authors of the article copies of the reviews or a motivated refusal, and also undertakes to send copies of the reviews to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation upon receipt of the corresponding request.

Peer-review specifics:

For the most objective assessment possible, peer review is conducted confidentially. The editors use the principle of “double blind reviewing”, in which the identity of the author is unknown to the reviewer.

The Executive Editor evaluates the relevance of the paper to the topics of the journal and its compliance with the requirements. After the agreement with the members of the Editorial Board, the paper is sent to the reviewer, a PhD in the scientific area which is the closest to the subject of the paper.

In 7 days the Executive Editor informs the authors about receiving the paper, and afterwards the paper is sent to the experts for review.

The reviewing time is determined by the Executive Editor individually in each case for the soonest publication if possible but does not exceed 30 days.

Reviewer commitments:

• within the agreed timescale, to provide written unbiased comment on scientific advantages and value of the work with a documented and reasonable opinion of the reviewers;
• to determine whether the stated data are clear, precise, and relevant;
• to assess the structure of the work, its academic accuracy, originality, and being of interest for the readers;
• to avoid personal comments and critics;
• to support the confidentiality of the peer-review process: prohibition on distribution, discussion with the third party, or disclosure of the information about the reviewed work.

The review should cover the following points:

• whether the paper content is relevant to the topic of the title;
• to what extent the paper corresponds to the modern achievements of science and theory;
• whether the paper is accessible for target audience considering the language, style, material layout, visual aspects of tables, diagrams, figures, etc.;
• whether the publication is reasonable considering previously published works on the topic;
• advantages and disadvantages that the paper has as well as revisions to be made by the author;
• the conclusion on the publication outcome: «accept», «request for changes» or «reject»;
• the reviews are authenticated in accordance with the procedure set by the institution that the reviewer is affiliated to.

If the paper is rejected the author receives the reasons from the Editorial Board.

The rejected paper may not be re-submitted. The review is sent to the author by e-mail, by fax, or by regular mail.

The positive review shall not be cause for publication. The final decision is made by the Editorial Board.

The Executive Editor informs the author of the paper acceptance and of the publication date.

The originals of reviews are stored in the Editorial Office of PSYCHOLOGY. PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY

.