Journal Peer Review Policies
Articles submitted to the editorial board of the journal, subject to compliance with the formal requirements, are checked through the plagiarism check system and then sent to secret reviewers.
If the author (s) of the article has a conflict of interest with another scientist, then this author (s) prepare and attach together with the article a cover letter with a request not to send the specified article to a certain scientist (columnist), indicating the presence of a conflict of interest.
Next, a "two-way secret" review is carried out by scientists (at least two) with an academic degree of candidate of Science, Doctor of Science, Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) and scientific specialization on the topic of the reviewed article.
The original of the secretly reviewed article is sent to reviewers via the electronic platform of the journal without specifying information about the authors. Reviewers should give a specific, objective and reasonable assessment of the article's compliance with the main scientific criteria, as well as the quality of its significance.
After receiving the reviewers 'opinion (if there are any comments), the editor-in-chief sends it to the author for correspondence to respond to the conclusion, make appropriate changes and re-send the manuscript to the electronic platform, without specifying the reviewers' data . The author (s) can make changes to the article and send it back to the editorial board.
After re-submitting the article by the author (s) with the elimination of all comments, the scientific editor re-sends the materials for review to the reviewer (s).
An article with positive reviews from two reviewers and the executive editor is submitted for publication in accordance with the procedure for accepting them for publication. Articles approved by the editorial board are then sent to the responsible editors, after which the article passed a comprehensive review is sent to the publisher.
If one of the reviewers gave a positive and the other – a negative conclusion, the scientific editor sends it to the third reviewer, who is a specialist on the topic of the manuscript, or a member of the editorial board. If a third reviewer or a member of the editorial board gives a positive review, the final decision on the acceptance / rejection of the article for publication is made by the scientific editor of the journal.
If both reviews are negative, the article is removed from publication in the journal.
The editors of the “Chemical Journal of Kazakhstan” are interested in assessing the quality and rating of the Journal and are making efforts for the inclusion of the Journal into the international citation database.
The articles containing the results of the original research, as well as the author's reviews on the topical issues in the chemical sciences are accepted for reviewing.
The authors of the articles, submitted in Russian and Kazakh, should use the list of references in two versions: one in the original language (Список литературы) and the other in Latin characters (References) as a transliterated list. The latter list is included in the English block (the structured Abstract and References) at the end of the article.
All manuscripts are checked for plagiarism using the iThenticate system. If any borrowings are detected, as well as if the coefficient of text originality is low (<75%), the manuscript is rejected from the publication. If a violation of the research ethics is found, the editorial board shall request an explanation from the authors. If the dispute cannot be resolved, the article will be retracted from the publication.
The articles are received by the editors through the online system and peer review of the articles. A submitted article is assigned a registration number, which should be referred to in the correspondence.
The obligations of the AUTHORS
The authors of the manuscript should provide the reliable results of the work done and an objective discussion of the research significance. The data underlying the work should be presented without errors. The description of the research materials and methods should be detailed in order to accurately reproduce it and obtain the appropriate results.
The reviews (including the systematic reviews) should also be accurate and objective.
The submission of the false data or deliberately erroneous statements in the manuscript will be regarded as a gross violation of the publication ethics. The manuscript will be rejected from the publication.
Evaluation and acceptance of the PUBLICATIONS
After receiving a manuscript, assigning it a registration number and notifying the authors, the editor of the Journal carries out an initial assessment of the compliance of the manuscript with the specificity of the Journal, relevance and novelty. Then, the article is sent for reviewing in order to ensure the quality of the published article, the correctness and reliability of the presentation of the results, to maintain a high scientific and theoretical level of the publication, as well as to select the most relevant and practically significant scientific papers.
The reviewers, who are the experts in the relevant field of research are appointed by the editor-in-chief from among the leading specialists in the article specificity.
The initial review is carried out within 14 working days. After the remarks are made, the manuscript is sent for initial revision (up to 7 calendar days).
The revised version of the text is sent for re-reviewing (up to 14 working days). The reviewer gives an opinion on the publication or rejection of the article.
The scientific editor of the Journal makes comments, makes corrections and coordinates them with the authors (up to 7 calendar days). The editors reserve the right to shorten the text and make editorial corrections, including the title of the article.
After scientific editing, the text is sent to the literary editor. The literary editor checks the compliance of the drawing-up of the manuscript with the Rules of the Journal. He makes comments, makes corrections and coordinates them with the authors (up to 7 calendar days).
During the submission of the manuscript and during the peer reviewing, the other manuscripts, describing the same results, cannot be simultaneously submitted for reviewing to other periodicals.
The date of the acceptance for the publication is the date of the receipt of a version, which meets all the requirements of the Journal. The priority order of the publication is determined by the date of the acceptance of the article for the publication.
The obligations of the REVIEWERS
The reviewing is carried out confidentially in the absence of a conflict of interest with the authors. The reviewers evaluate the publications for the compliance with the Journal criteria:
- drawing-up of the article in accordance with the Rules for the Authors;
- significance, originality;
- sufficiency of the background information in the introduction;
- correctness of setting up the experiment and interpreting the research results;
- confirmation of the conclusions by the experimental results;
- clarity and consistency of the presentation;
- quality of the translation into English, Kazakh and Russian.
The review also includes the comments and suggestions for the authors and the dates of the receipt of the article by the Editorial Board and of reviewing.
The reviewer may make the following recommendations:
- “The article can be recommended for the publication" – in case if the manuscript does not contain errors, meets the requirements for relevance and originality of the scientific research. In this case, the manuscript is included in the list of the proposed publications in the Journal;
- “The article can be recommended for the publication, subject to its revision in accordance with the comments of the reviewer.” In this case, the article is sent to the authors for the revision. After receiving the revised text, the editors send the article for reviewing by the reviewer again. If the reviewer still has significant comments on the article, the article is rejected by the decision of the Editorial Board without the right of the further revision.
- “The article cannot be recommended for the publication.” In this case, the article, by the decision of the Editorial Board, is either rejected or sent for re-reviewing, which is possible only once for the given article.
