Reviewing

All scientific papers submitted to the editorial office of the Journal “Discourse” undergo mandatory two-way anonymous (“blind”) review (the manuscript authors do not know the reviewers and receive a letter with comments signed by the editor-in-chief).

1. Reviewing of papers is carried out by members of the editorial board, as well as invited reviewers - leading experts in the relevant industry of Russia and other countries.  The decision to choose one or another reviewer for the examination of the paper is made by the chief editor, deputy chief editor, scientific editor, head of the section.  The review period is 2-4 weeks, but at the request of the reviewer it can be extended.
2. Each paper is sent to 2 reviewers.
3. Each reviewer should refuse to review if there is a clear conflict of interest, affecting the perception and interpretation of manuscript materials.  Based on the results of the manuscript review, the reviewer makes recommendations on the further fate of the paper (each decision of the reviewer is justified):
• the paper is recommended for publication in its current form;
• the paper is recommended for publication after the correction of the deficiencies noted by the reviewer;
• the paper needs additional review by another specialist;
• the paper cannot be published in the Journal.
4. If the review contains recommendations for correcting and finalizing the paper, the editorial board sends the author the text of the review with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the paper or to refute them in part or in full.  Refinement of the paper should not take more two months from the date of sending an electronic message to the authors about the need to make changes
5. In case of refusal of the authors to finalize the materials, they should notify the editors in writing or orally about their refusal to publish the paper. If the authors do not return the revised version after 3 months from the date of sending the review, even if there is no information from the authors with a refusal to finalize the paper, the editors remove it from the register. In such situations, the authors are sent a corresponding notice on the removal of the manuscript from registration due to the expiration of the time allotted for revision.
6. If the author and reviewers have encountered insoluble contradictions regarding the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to send the manuscript for additional review.  In conflict situations, the decision is made by the chief editor.
7. The decision to refuse to publish the manuscript is made at a meeting of the editorial board in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers.  A paper not recommended for publication by the decision of the editorial board is not accepted for re-consideration.  A refusal to publish is sent to the author by e-mail.
8. After the editorial board of the Journal has made a decision on the admission of a paper to publication, the editorial office informs the author about this and indicates the date of publication.  
9. The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient basis for the publication of a paper.  The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board.  In conflict situations, the decision is made by the chief editor.
10. The originals of reviews are kept in the editorial office of the Journal for 5 years.
11. Not peer-reviewed are the following papers:
• articles written by members of the State Academies if Sciences;
• articles recommended for publication, i.e. scientific reports listened to at congresses, conferences, etc.;
• informative, promotional, image-building articles,  reports and announcements.