ISSN 2587-814X (print),
ISSN 2587-8158 (online)

Russian version: ISSN 1998-0663 (print),
ISSN 2587-8166 (online)

Peer reviewing

All the papers submitted for publication in «Business Informatics» journal are subject to reviewing and approval by the Editorial Board.

The journal uses double-blind review, which means the identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa.

The manuscript submitted to the editors is subject to initial review and verification for compliance to the topics of the journal and formal editorial requirements. If the paper doesn’t comply with the subject-matter or formal requirements of the journal it excludes from further consideration, the author is notified about it.

If the paper is compliant with the topics and formal requirements is assigned for reviewing to an expert – a member of the Editorial Board (internal review). The paper can also be submitted for evaluation by an independent expert (external review).

The review process is anonymous both for the referee and for the author. The review results are provided by the referee in written form. The review should include general evaluation of the paper’s content and principal judgment on whether it could be published in the journal, specific enumeration of errors in the methodology and tools (if any), as well as recommendations for improving of the text.

According to the reviewing results the paper may be accepted for publication, sent to the author for revision, or rejected.

Upon receipt of a positive conclusion of the referee the paper is placed in the journal’s portfolio for further publication. Executive secretary of the Editorial Board informs the author about the acceptance of the paper. The final decision on the publication of the paper and approval of the total contents of the journal’s issue are adopted at a meeting of the editorial board.

The procedure for review and approval of papers is from one to two months, then articles are published in order of priority. The Editorial Board may decide on an extraordinary publication of the paper.

Upon receipt of a negative conclusion of the reviewer the paper is discussed on the meeting of the Editorial Board working group, which makes a decision on rejection of the article or the need for further review by an independent expert. In case of paper’s rejection, an appropriate notification is sent to the author. 

Preparing an article for publication undertaken by the editors includes normal literary editing and fine-tuning of the text according to the internal editorial standards adopted for the journal. All the changes made by the editors are to be coordinated with the author.

 A guide for reviewers.pdf

Rambler's Top100 rss