Peer-review process

All articles submitted to Jоurnаl of the National Uпіvеrsіtу of Оstrоh Асаdеmу. Sеrіеs “Lаw” are subject to peer-review.

Peer review aims to maintain the strict selection of manuscripts for publication and make specific recommendations for improvement. The review procedure is focused on the most objective assessment of a scholarly article’s content, establishing its compliance with the journal’s requirements, and providing a comprehensive analysis of the article’s advantages and disadvantages.

One of the editorial board members conducts peer review in confidence following the principles of a double-blind review (neither authors nor reviewers know each other’s names).

Review criteria:

- Is the topic relevant to the journal’s scientific profile?

- Does the article title render the content and purpose of the article?

- Are scholarly arguments logical and convincing?

- Are the research findings presented methodologically correctly?

- Do the conclusions reflect the research findings fully and accurately? Do they present a new discovery and give suggestions for further research?

- Could or should some parts of the article be shortened, deleted, expanded, or revised?

Based on the review, the author can receive one of the following responses: the article is accepted for publication; it is recommended to edit the article; the article is rejected.

Upon a positive review, a reviewer informs the editorial board, which makes the final decision on the article’s publication. The article approved for publication is processed by the layout and literary editors. The editors make minor stylistic, spelling, and technical corrections that do not affect content without the author’s consent.

The authors are informed about the review outcome and the editorial board’s opinion by e-mail. If the reviewer indicates the need to improve the article, the executive secretary asks the author to take into account the comments when preparing an updated version of the article or, in case of disagreement, to reasonably refute them.