|Review type||Single - blind peer review|
|Number of reviews||2 reviews per manuscript|
|Review period||45 days|
|Reviewers||Members of the editorial board of the journal, as well as external reviewers - leading experts in the field|
|Reviewer profiles||Posting reviews on various electronic platforms (Publons, Elibrary) is encouraged (at the request of the reviewer, following the ethical standards of reviewing)|
We greatly appreciate your assistance in reviewing the manuscript to improve the quality of articles published in our journal.
Before making the review, we recommend that you get acquainted with the Peer review policy (ссылка), as well as Ethical Principles of the Reviewer's Activity (ссылка) of the Journal of Advanced Materials and Technologies.
Peer review is based on mutual respect between the author and the reviewer, implies their equality as participants in the scientific process. The main purpose of peer review is to assess the scientific value of the article and the compliance of the article with the general requirements for scientific work.
If you have ethical doubts about the peer-reviewed manuscript (conflict of interest, duplicate publication, plagiarism of ideas or text, unreliable results, falsification of data, etc.), be sure to inform the editor-in-chief or the editor who sent you the peer review request.
Please let us know if, for one reason or another, you are unable to review the submitted manuscript. In this case, we would be grateful if you can recommend another reviewer to us (please provide the full name and contact details of the recommended reviewer).
Please try to complete your review within a month of receiving the manuscript. If you have the opportunity to review, but you need additional time, please let us know before the end of the review period.
The editorial board of the journal ensures that your name and the very fact of your recommendation will not be made public. Single-blind peer review is accepted in our journal, but if you deem it reasonable and necessary to reveal your name to the author, the editorial board will agree with your decision.
We will also be happy if you give your consent to post the full text of the review or part of it in the Russian Science Citation Index, while the indication of the review author can be hidden at your request. The editorial board of the Journal of Advanced Materials and Technologies welcomes your desire to post the text of the review on the Publons platform or other specialized resources. Please inform the editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief about your consent to post information.
The editorial board of the Journal of Advanced Materials and Technologies highly appreciates your contribution to the development of our journal and to scientific knowledge in general. As gratitude for your contribution and recognition of your high expert and scientific level, we would be glad to place information about you in the "Personalities" section. The posting of information does not violate the principles of anonymity of the review process and does not include data about the manuscripts with which you have worked or are working. Please inform the Chief editor or Deputy Chief editor about your consent to post information about you.
Editorial Board of Journal of Advanced Materials and Technologies
Reviewing in the Journal of Advanced Materials and Technologies is carried out on a voluntary basis. If you want to become a reviewer in our journal, please let us know about it at the email address:
We will be grateful if you provide the following information about yourself:
- Full Name;
- Degree (if any);
- Place of work, position;
- Scientific specialty, field of scientific interests;
- Identifiers (if any): ORCID, Researcher ID, AuthorID (Scopus), SPIN code (RSCI);
- Information about the latest publications;
- Experience in reviewing scientific articles (if any).
1. The reviewer, who previously agreed to cooperate with the journal, receives an email with a request to review the manuscript in accordance with his scientific profile.
The letter includes the following information:
- - title, abstract, keywords of the manuscript;
- - deadline to send a response to the editor about the consent or refusal to review the manuscript.
2. The consent of the reviewer to cooperate with the journal implies agreement with the Peer review policy (ссылка), as well as with the Ethical Principles of the Reviewer's Activity (ссылка) of the Journal of Advanced Materials and Technologies
If the reviewer does not agree with certain rules adopted in the journal, please inform the Chief editor about this before the start of the review procedure.
3. Reviewing is carried out on a voluntary basis. If the manuscript corresponds to the field of scientific interests of the reviewer, he has the time and desire to do this work, the reviewer agrees to prepare a review of the manuscript.
4. After obtaining consent, the reviewer is sent the full text of the manuscript and the review template.
5. When reviewing a manuscript, the editors ask to evaluate the following parameters: correspondence of the subject of the article to the subject of the journal; information content and sufficiency of the abstract of the article; novelty and significance of the results; validity and correctness of the application of the methods used in the study; compliance of the results obtained with the goals and objectives of the study; sufficiency and completeness of citation of literature on the research topic; sufficiency and justification of illustrative material and tables; correctness of the form and style of presentation of the material
6. In conclusion, the editorial board asks for a recommendation (with brief comments):
- to recommend the manuscript for publication in the presented form (without comments);
- to recommend the manuscript for publication with minor (technical) corrections;
- to recommend the manuscript for publication after substantial revision;
- the manuscript needs additional reviewing by another specialist;
- reject the manuscript.
7. If the review contains recommendations for correcting and revising the article, the executive secretary sends the text of the review to the author with a proposal to take them into account when editing the manuscript or reasonably (partially or completely) refute them.
8. The manuscript, revised by the author in accordance with the comments received, or a letter with a reasoned refusal to correct them, are sent for review to the same reviewer who made the critical comments.
9. The reviewer re-evaluates the article taking into account the changes made or a reasonable refusal to eliminate them.
10. Correspondence between the author and the reviewer is conducted through the executive secretary of the editorial board.
11. The accepted period for reviewing the manuscript is no more than a month. At the request of the reviewer, this period can be extended by agreement with the editors.