The procedure for reviewing articles

All scientific articles submitted to the editorial office of the Toraigyrov University journal undergo mandatory two-way anonymous ("blind") peer review (reviewers do not know the authors, the authors of the manuscript do not know the reviewers). Reviewing of manuscripts of scientific articles in the editorial office of the journal is carried out in order to maintain its high scientific and theoretical level.

The procedure for reviewing manuscripts submitted for publication in scientific journals "Toraigyrov University":

1. Scientific articles received from the authors undergo primary control for completeness and correctness of design (the entire article file, with all the output data, annotations and keywords in three languages, bibliography, information about the authors) is also checked for the presence of borrowed text through the Strikeplagiarism system .com ".

2. The primary assessment of a scientific article for compliance with the profile of the journal and proposals for the candidacy of one reviewer is carried out by the editor-in-chief and executive secretary for each series of the journal.

3. Reviewers must be recognized experts in the subject of the reviewed article.

The reviewer cannot be the co-author of the peer-reviewed work, scientific supervisors of applicants for a scientific degree.

Reviewers are notified that the manuscripts submitted to them for review are the intellectual property of the authors and refer to information that is not subject to disclosure.

If conflicting reviews are received from reviewers, the editorial board has the right to send the article to another reviewer.

The reviewer is obliged to evaluate the manuscript within 2-4 weeks.

4. As a result of an expert assessment of a scientific article, the reviewer can:

- to recommend the article for publication;

- to recommend the article for publication after revision, taking into account the comments;

- recommend rejecting the article.

5. Comments and suggestions of the reviewer (without specifying his personal data) are sent to the author.

If the review contains recommendations for correcting and revising the article, the editorial staff of the journal sends the text of the review to the author of the article with a proposal to take these recommendations into account when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them reasonably (partially or completely).

6. The article, revised by the author, is re-sent for reviewing.

7. If the author refuses to revise the materials, he should notify the editorial office in writing or orally about his refusal to publish the article. If the author does not provide a revised version of the article after one month from the date of sending him the reviewer's answer, the editorial office removes the article from the register. In such situations, the author is notified of the removal of the manuscript from registration due to the expiration of the time allotted for revision.

8. If the author and reviewers have insoluble contradictions regarding the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief at a meeting of the editorial board.

9. The decision to refuse publication of the manuscript is made at the meeting of the editorial board in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. An article not recommended for publication by the decision of the editorial board is not accepted for reconsideration. The refusal to publish is sent to the author by e-mail.

10. The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient reason for the publication of the article. The final decision on the expediency of publication is made by the editorial board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.

11. The editorial board does not enter into discussions with authors about the decisions it makes.