Peer Review Policy

After the manuscript has been submitted, it is moderated from the point of view of the Journal’s scope and requirements. All manuscripts are verified for their originality using the originality detection software.

Manuscripts that do not meet the formal requirements are not registered and are not considered, their authors are informed about the decision made.

After the moderation, manuscripts are subject to double-blind peer review (the reviewer does not who the author of the article is, the author of the article does not know who the reviewer is). Appointed reviewers can refuse to analyze the manuscript in case there is a conflict of interest or if they cannot provide an unbiased review for some reason.

After receiving the manuscript, the reviewer analyzes it following the form of expert evaluation established by the Editorial Board, guided by the proposed reviewer’s checklist.

The review assumes an assessment of the manuscript according to the following criteria:

  • correspondence of the article’s subject to the scientific profile of the journal;
  • relevance of the chosen topic;
  • availability of a literature review sufficient to formulate a theoretical problem;
  • general analysis of the research level reflecting the development of knowledge;
  • reasonableness of the presentation and conclusions, in particular, compliance of the methods, recommendations and research results used by the author with modern achievements of science and practice;
  • compliance of the title and quality of the abstract of the article with its content.

Based on the above analysis, the reviewer concludes the possibility of publication and gives recommendations (if necessary).

The Editorial Board makes the final decision on the acceptance of the article.

In case of a positive decision to accept the manuscript for publishing in the Journal of Economic Theory, the Editorial board informs the author about the acceptance of the article for publication, indicating the publication dates.

The article accepted for publication is provided to the technical editor. The technical editor without the consent of the author makes minor stylistic or formal corrections that do not affect the content of the article. If necessary or at the request of the author, the manuscripts in the form of article layout are returned to the author for approval.

In case of the article rejection, the Editorial Board informs the author about the decision made in accordance with the terms of consideration. In this case, the Editorial Board sends copies of reviews or a motivated refusal to the author.

If the reviewer indicates the need to make certain corrections to the article, the article is sent to the author with a proposal to take into account the comments when preparing an updated version of the article. After correction, the article is reviewed again. In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer, the author of the article has the right to provide a reasoned answer to the Editorial Board of the Journal. In this case, the article is considered at a meeting of the Editorial Board. The Editorial Board may send the article for an additional or new review to another specialist. The Editorial Board retains the right to reject articles in the case of invalidity of the arguments presented by the author, or his/her unwillingness to take into account the recommendations and comments of reviewers.