Ethical principles in the activities of reviewers

The reviewer performs a scientific examination of the author’s materials, his actions herewith should be unbiased, consisting in the implementation of the following principles:

A manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document that cannot be handed for familiarizing or discussing to a third party who does not have the authority to exercise such authority on the part of the editors.

The reviewer can discuss the content of the submitted manuscript of articles only with the persons approved by the editorial board of the journal. The reviewer is obliged not to use in any way the ideas and information presented in the submitted article before publication of this article.

The reviewer must be objective regarding the scientific content and scientific significance of the article. If there is a conflict of interest that may question the scientific objectivity of the reviewer, the reviewer must immediately inform the editorial board of the journal about the impossibility of reviewing the submitted article.

Personal criticism of the authors of the article is unacceptable. If the reviewer believes that he is not an expert on the issues discussed in the article, or understands that he will not be able to submit a review of the article in a timely manner, then he must immediately inform the Editorial Board about the impossibility of reviewing this article.

The reviewer must evaluate completeness and objectivity of the reflection in the article of the existing state of the issues under consideration and, if necessary, indicate (as far as possible with precise bibliographic references) the insufficiency of such completeness and objectivity.