Peer-review process
In the academic periodical "History and Law Journal", a system of double-blind peer review is applied, meaning that the reviewer does not have information about the authors or the other reviewer, and the authors are not informed about the identity of the reviewers.
A manuscript submitted by the author(s) is considered by the editorial board for compliance with the requirements of the journal’s editorial policy, relevance, correct formatting, and the absence of violations of legislation, academic integrity, and publication ethics no later than 20 working days. If obvious violations are identified, the submitted scientific material is returned to the author by email with an indication of the reasons for its return. In case of elimination of the indicated deficiencies, the author has the opportunity to resubmit the scientific article for publication.
The Editor-in-Chief and members of the editorial board appoint reviewers in the case of a preliminary positive assessment of the submitted scientific article. The selection of reviewers is carried out on the basis of the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) (in particular, the Peer Review Toolkit – https://ease.org.uk/communities/peer-review-committee/peer-review-toolkit/how-to-select-reviewers/).
The criteria for selecting reviewers are their professional expertise and impartiality. The manuscript, without author identification, is sent by the editorial board via email to two experts who are certified specialists in the relevant field of research, have publications within the last three years in journals indexed in scientometric databases Scopus and Web of Science, and in journals included in the List of Scientific Professional Publications of Ukraine; who are not financially or administratively interested in the reviewed research and for whom there are no indications of a conflict of interest with the author(s) of the article.
In the review of a submitted article, the reviewer must clearly, argumentatively, and impartially present their assessment regarding:
– the relevance of the research topic;
– the relevance of the research methods and data processing methods used;
– the correctness and completeness of the sources used;
– the independence and originality of the conducted research;
– the novelty and reliability of the obtained results;
– the validity and correctness of the conclusions;
– the absence of violations of academic integrity.
Based on the conclusions for each of the specified criteria, the reviewer must formulate a general position on whether the reviewed scientific article may be published.
The review must include the date of completion and the reviewer’s signature with the necessary information about academic degree, academic title, and place of employment.
The peer review process must be completed no later than 40 working days from the date the materials are received by the reviewer.
The completed review is sent to the editorial board via email info@chasopys.hl.vnu.volyn.ua or in printed form by postal mail to the address: 30 Vynnychenka Street, Lutsk, Volyn Region, Ukraine, 43025.
In the case of receipt of both positive and negative reviews for a scientific article, the Editor-in-Chief appoints an additional reviewer and, based on their conclusion, makes the final decision.
The author of the article is informed about the acceptance of the scientific article for publication or its rejection via email to the address provided. The editorial board does not enter into discussions with authors and does not disclose the identity of reviewers or their evaluations of submitted materials.
