BLIND PEER REVIEW POLICY OF ARTICLES IN "BULLETIN OF THE KHARKIV STATE ACADEMY OF DESIGN AND ARTS"

1. The purpose of peer review, which is anonymous for both the reviewer and the authors (blind peer review), is to improve the quality of scientific articles published in the publication through their evaluation by highly qualified experts in relevant fields.

2. The articles prepared in accordance with the Requirements for Publications in the Bulletin of the KSADA are allowed for review.

3. In case of remarks at the stage of initial control, the article is returned to the author.

4. In case of observance of item 2 the editor-in-chief deletes from a file the information on the author / authors (encodes article) and sends it by e-mail to the member of the editorial board, department editor or the external reviewer.

5. Ukrainian and foreign researchers who have academic papers on the issues on the issues outlined in the article are invited to review.

6. A member of the editorial board or an external reviewer studies the article and fills in a standard review form. He chooses one of the options of the recommendation: "recommend the article for printing", "return the article for correction and editing", "return the article for revision", "do not recommend the article for printing". In case of refusal or need for revision, the reviewer provides a reasoned explanation of the reasons for such a decision.

7. The review period lasts one month from the date of receipt of the article. The final decision on the article is made taking into account the received reviews by the editor-in-chief, members of the editorial board and the department editors.

8. Поширені причини для відмови:
the article as a research is incomplete or incorrectly structured;
the article does not convincingly describe the research part, from which the analysis proposed by the author(s) is not fully understood;
the article has no scientific novelty;
the article does not clearly identify what part of the conclusions is a novelty for science in contrast to what was already known;
the number of relevant links in the article is insufficient;
the article contains theories, concepts or conclusions that are not supported by data, arguments or information.

9. Further work with the article accepted for publication is carried out by the editors in accordance with the technological process of preparation of the publication.

10. Articles that need to be revised are sent to the author / authors together with the text of the review, which contains specific recommendations for revision of the article. The anonymity of reviewers is guaranteed by the editors.

11. The revised version of the article is re-sent for blind review. In case of repeated negative result the article is rejected and is not subject to further consideration.

12. The editorial board does not enter into discussions with the authors of the rejected articles.

13. Reviews and recommendations for each article are stored in the editorial office in electronic form for three years from the date of publication of the collection in which the peer-reviewed article is placed.