The procedure for reviewing articles is regulated by the “Article Reviewing Regulations” which are submitted to the editorial board of the scientific economic journal “Visnyk of the Berdyansk University of Management and Business”
“Article Reviewing Regulations”
which are submitted to the editorial board of the scientific economic journal “Visnyk of the Berdyansk University of Management and Business”
I. General Provisions
1. This provision regulates the procedure for reviewing articles submitted to the editorial board the scientific economic journal “Visnyk of the Berdyansk University of Management and Business” (further — the journal).
2. In this provision, the following terms shall apply as follows:
Author – is a person or a group of people (group of authors), who prepared a scientific article after the results of passed scientific survey and provide it into consideration of editing board of the journal
Responsible secretary – is a person, who organizes the work of scheduling questions, timely and high-quality preparation of material for printing.
Head editor – is a person, who leads the editor board of the journal and gives the final decisions, which are regarded to the fascicle of the journal.
Editing board – is a managing apparatus, which executes the complex of actions, regarding the composing of material and publishing of the journal. The roster of editing board is linked on the website of the journal:
Recommendation – is a written or endorsed comment regarding the work, signed by the supervisor of the graduate student ‒ the author of the article, or another specialist who has a degree of doctor or candidate of economical science. The recommendation of the article to the publishing must be submitted together with the manuscript of the article, whose author does not have a scientific degree.
A reviewer ‒ is an expert who acts on behalf of a journal and conducts scientific review of articles submitted in order to determine the possibility of their publication in the journal. The reviewer can be a person who has a scientific degree in economics and has published research papers on the issues examined in the peer-reviewed article.
Reviewing ‒ is a procedure for reviewing and estimating by reviewers the articles that have been submitted to a journal in order to establish their scientific and theoretical level and compliance with the requirements for journal articles.
Working Group ‒ a group of four editorial board members at least, who decide to recommend articles for publication. The roster of the working group is determined by the head editor before the start of the work on the next fascicle of the journal.
3. Scientific articles, which submitted to the editorial board of the journal, can be reviewed.
4. The members’ Articles of the journal’s editorial board, scientists with significant academic backgrounds in corresponding specialisation, and articles prepared as an order for the journal may not be subject to the standard review procedure. In such circumstances, the decision to approve the article is made by the working group, by a majority vote (a deciding vote has a head reviewer).
5. The reviewer for the reviewing of the scientific article is choosed by the head editor of the journal, by taking into account the topic of the article and the sphere of professional interest of the reviewer. The reviewer is selected from the editorial board of the journal. If it’s necessary, the head editor of the journal may involve an expert person who is not included in the editorial board of the journal. The review involves national and foreign doctors of science who have scientific works on the issues stated in the article.
6. All reviewers should be as objective and impartial as possible and must obey the ethics requirements of the Committee on Publication Ethics in the scientific publications.
II. Procedure for reviewing articles
1. The author submits an article to the Editorial Board of the journal, executed in compliance with the requirements http://visnik.bumib.edu.ua/?page_id=12 which should fit the journal article (further ‒ requirements). Article which is not appropriate to the requirements would not be registered and is not allowed for further review, as would be reported by the author of the article.
2. Before starting reviewing, the responsible secretary of the journal must:
2.1. Determines the degree of uniqueness of the author’s text using software:
If the uniqueness of the article is less than 70%, it is not allowed for further review and is returned to the author.
2.2. Carries out the coding of the article (assignment of a registration number and depersonalization of data on the author of the article).
3. The review procedure is anonymous for both the author of the article and the reviewer and is proceeded by the double-blind method (the review process is anonymous for both the reviewer and the author). The interaction between the author of the article and the reviewers is proceeded by e-mailing through the responsible secretary.
4. The coded article is sent to the reviewer, who was selected head editor, by email.
5. In time of 5 calendar days from the date of receiving the article, the reviewer should evaluate the possibility of reviewing the article, taking into account his / her own qualifications, stated issues of the article and lack of interest’s conflict , which he informs the head editor of the journal about. In case if the conflict of interest or unopportunity to review appears, the head editor will make the decision to appoint another reviewer. The refuse of the reviewer to review the article should be based.
6. In time of 20 calendar days from the date of receiving the article, the reviewer gives a decision about printing the article in the journal. If it would be necessary, the deadline of reviewing the article can be extend to 25 days, which reviewer informs the head editor of the journal about.
7. Regarding the result of the review, the reviewer fulfills the standardized form (Appendix No.1 of this Regulation), where is defined one of the following responsibilities:
a) recommend article to print;
b) recommend an article for publication with editorial corrections;
c) return the article to the author for revision;
d) not to recommend article to print (with justification of reasons).
8. The review form completed by the reviewer is sent to the executive secretary of the journal.
9. The executive secretary informs the author of the article about the results of the review by sending an e-mail.
10. If the reviewer decides to complete the article, the responsible secretary of the journal, in agreement with the head editor, sends the article to the author for the finishing. The list of comments, questions, and comments of the reviewer is attached to the letter. The period of revision is determined by the head editor of the journal and should not exceed 10 calendar days from the date of receiving of the article by the author.
11. The author adds a letter to the updated article, which contains answers to the reviewer’s comments, questions, and an explanation of any changes that have been made to the content of the article.
12. An updated version of the article is re-submitted to the reviewer for deciding. During 5 days of receiving the updated article, the reviewer provides one of the following decisions:
– recommend article to print;
– not to recommend article to print.
13. If the author of the article does not agree with the opinion of the reviewer, he or she has the right to submit a reasoned answer to the editorial board of the journal. In such circumstances, the article is considered at a meeting of a working group that examines in detail the opinion of the reviewer and author of the article. The journal working group may send the article for additional reviewing to another reviewer. The Working Group keeps the right to reject the article in case of author’s unableness or unwillingness to take into account the reviewer’s comments. The author of the article shall be informed separately about any decisions taken by the working group.
14. Reviews and recommendations for each article are kept in the electronic version for 2 years from the date of publication of the Visnyk issue, which contains the reviewed article.
ІII. Deciding on the publication of articles
1. The final decision about possibility of publishing an article in a journal is made by the head editor of the journal and, if necessary, by the working group of the journal. The responsible secretary informs the author of the article about the decision.
2. An article, which has been accepted for publication is provided to a literary editor. Minor stylistic corrections that do not affect the content of the article can be made by a technical editor without the agreement of the author. The layout of the editing article would be returned to the author for approval. Editing should be agreed within 2 days from the date of receiving of the article with editing by the literary editor at the author’s e-mail address.
3. Among the articles that have been reviewed and edited by the technical editor of the journal, the responsible secretary generates another journal number, which is signed by the head editor and recommended for publication by the Academic Council of Berdyansk University of Management and Business.
4. The author of the article is responsible for copyright infringement. The author of the article is responsible for the accuracy of the facts and data, the validity of maden conclusions, and the scientific and theoretical level of the article.
Head Editor: Doctor of Economics, Professor L.I. Antoshkina
 Conflict of interest – the presence of the reviewer private (beneficial and personal non-beneficial) interest, which can potentially affect on the objectivity and impartiality of the decision made by the reviewer regarding the results of the review.