THE PROCEDURE
for sending, reviewing and publishing articles in the journal
"Bulletin of Donetsk National University. Series B. Economics and Law"

1. Editorial board of the journal "Bulletin of Donetsk National University. Series B. Economics and Law" accepts articles and reviews on the subject of the journal. Materials are accepted for consideration only on condition that it meets the requirements for the original author's articles (materials) printed in the journal or posted on the journal page.

2. All articles submitted to the editorial board are subject to peer review and (in case of a positive review) scientific and technical editing.

3. The editor-in-chief (deputy editor-in-chief) sends the article for review to a member of the editorial board in charge of the relevant field/ scientific discipline. In the absence of a member of the editorial board or receipt of an article from a member of the editorial board, the editor-in-chief sends the article for review to external reviewers.

4. All reviewers must be recognized experts on the subject of peer-reviewed materials and have published on the subject of the reviewed article within the last 5 years.

5. The reviewer must review the submitted article within a month from the date of receipt and send to the editorial office (by e-mail) a reasoned refusal to review or a review.

6. The editorial board recommends using a standard form when reviewing. The reviewer may recommend the article for publication; recommend it for publication after revision, taking into account comments; not recommend the article for publication. If the reviewer recommends the article for publication after revision, taking into account comments, or does not recommend the article for publication, the reasons for such a decision should be indicated in the review.

7. The presence of a significant proportion of the reviewer's critical comments with an overall positive recommendation makes it possible to classify the material as polemical and print it in the order of scientific discussion.

8. When evaluating reviews, it is necessary to pay attention to the relevance of the scientific problem being solved by the author. The review should unambiguously characterize the theoretical or applied significance of the research, correlate the author's conclusions with existing scientific concepts. A necessary element of the review should be the reviewer's assessment of the personal contribution of the author of the article to solving the problem under consideration. It is advisable to note in the review the correspondence of the style, logic and accessibility of the presentation to the scientific nature of the material, as well as to obtain a conclusion on the reliability and validity of the conclusions.

9. After receiving the reviews, the issue of the received articles is considered at the next meeting of the editorial board and a final decision is made based on the evaluation of the review on the publication or refusal to publish the articles. Based on the decision, a letter is sent to the author/s. The letter gives an overall assessment of the article, if the article can be published after revision / taking into account comments, recommendations for revision / removal of comments are given, if the article is not accepted for publication, the reasons for such a decision are indicated.

10. If there are sufficient grounds for this, articles may be sent for additional review.

11. The involvement of external reviewers is possible in the following cases: when there is no member of the editorial board overseeing a certain direction, scientific discipline; a member of the editorial board is unable to prepare a review; the editorial board does not agree with the opinion expressed in the review by a member of the editorial board; an article is received from a member of the editorial board. At the next meeting of the editorial board, a decision is made to request a review from a scientist who has scientific papers on the issues stated in the article. On behalf of the editorial board, a letter is sent to such a scientist requesting a review. The article and the recommended review form are attached to the letter.

12. Reviews are kept in the editorial office of the journal for five years. At the request of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, the editorial board of the journal sends copies of article reviews to the Ministry.

13. The Editorial Board sends the authors of the submitted materials copies of the reviews or a reasoned refusal. The Editorial Board does not enter into a discussion with the authors of rejected articles, except in cases defined as an obvious misunderstanding.

14. Manuscripts are not returned to the authors.