+7 925 966 4690, 9am6pm (GMT+3), Monday – Friday
ИД «Финансы и кредит»







Regulations on Reviewing

Revised version, July 2018

Русская версия

1. General

1.1. The Regulations on the procedure for reviewing manuscripts is part of the Editorial policy of Publishing house FINANCE and CREDIT (hereinafter referred to as Publisher), and governs the procedure for peer review of manuscripts to ensure a high quality of scientific journals of the Publisher.

1.2. The Regulations on the procedure for reviewing manuscripts regulate relations between participants in the publication process, in compliance with the major provisions of the Publishing ethics of the Publisher.

1.3. The review is confidential, and closed in accordance with sections 2.1 and 2.2 of the Regulations.

2. Review procedure and deadlines

2.1. Review is a two-way anonymous "double-blind" peer-review.

2.2. All copyright materials (manuscripts) are subject to "depersonalization" (removal of Author's affiliation) to be transmitted for review.

2.3. Review of manuscripts is ever carried out by highly qualified specialists (Reviewers), whose names are never disclosed.

2.4. Reviewers do not have the right to make copies of the manuscripts for personal research and submit a manuscript (or a part of it) for review to another person in accordance with the ethical standards and demands of the Publisher.

2.5. Review deadline for manuscripts shall not exceed 30 calendar days from the transmittal of the manuscripts to the Reviewer.

3. Requirements for review's content

3.1. The review should include an authoritative analysis and objective assessment of the manuscript.

3.2. The review should reflect the expert assessment of the manuscript quality, namely:

  • match of the manuscript contents its name;
  • analysis and assessment of scientific level, novelty, importance and relevance of the topic (problem); theoretical or an applied value of the work;
  • line of techniques used by the Author, recommendations and results of the study with modern achievements of science and practice;
  • reliability of the facts; full disclosure of the topic;
  • desirability and feasibility of manuscript tables, graphs, and other illustrative materials;
  • relating the Author's findings with the existing scientific concepts;
  • discussion and conclusions; the reliability and validity of the findings;
  • evaluation of the personal contribution of the Author of the manuscript to the study topic (problem);
  • compliance with the language, style and logic of the scientific nature of the manuscript; the presence of links on the used literature and other information sources; deficiencies, inaccuracies and errors made by the Author of the manuscript.

3.3. The review should contain a recommendation for the publication of the manuscript, to finalize (supplement, clarify) it or rejection of the manuscript.

3.4. The review of a manuscript, executed in written form shall be sent to the Publisher.

3.5. The review of a manuscript may be written in free form in compliance with the requirements of sections 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 of the Regulations.

4. Submitting reviews to Authors

4.1. The Publisher shall send the review (core reviews) to the Author of the manuscript without specifying names, functional titles and affiliation of the Reviewer.

4.2. Upon receipt of a positive assessment of the manuscript the Publisher shall inform the Author of the manuscript of acceptance for publication and the planned date of publication.

4.3. If the review contains a substantial portion of criticism when the overall assessment of the manuscript material is positive, the material can be designated as a polemical one and may be accepted for publication in the journal as a scholarly dispute.

4.4. If the review contains recommendations for improvement (clarify, supplement, etc.) the manuscript shall be sent to the Author for revision, indicating the deadline by which the Reviewer's comments should be removed, and the manuscript should be improved. A modified version of the manuscript is to be sent for proofreading to obtain a qualified opinion on the further refinement of the publication or rejection of the manuscript.

4.5. When receiving negative reviews, the Publisher shall have the right to send the manuscript to further review, or send it to the Author for finalization, or reject it.

4.6. In case of rejection of the manuscript, the Author shall receive a letter indicating the reasons for rejection.

5. Conclusion

5.1. The Publisher shall keep the reviews for 3 years.

5.2. The reviews shall be submitted to the Higher Attestation Commission (VAK) of the RF Ministry of Education and Science upon the request from the VAK.