All manuscripts submitted to the Collection of Scientific Papers “Railbound Rolling Stock” undergo a peer review process.
Purpose of Peer Review
The goal of peer review is to ensure a rigorous selection of manuscripts, enhancing the scientific value and quality of the articles published in the journal. The review process aims to provide an objective evaluation of the manuscript’s content, highlighting its strengths and weaknesses through written reports from highly qualified specialists.
Type of Review
The journal employs a double-blind peer review process: reviewers do not have access to authors’ personal information, and authors do not know the identities of reviewers.
Reviewer Selection Criteria
Reviewers are independent specialists holding a PhD or Doctorate in Technical Sciences, with publications in the relevant field of the submitted manuscript. Eligible reviewers must meet at least one of the following criteria:
-
At least one publication in the last three years in journals included in the Ukrainian national list or in international journals indexed in Scopus or Web of Science;
-
At least three publications in the last five years in professional journals;
-
Authorship of monographs or book chapters published by international publishers classified as category A, B, or C according to the Research School for Socio-Economic and Natural Sciences of the Environment (SENSE).
All reviewers are expected to be objective and impartial, adhering to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers and the Ethical Code of a Scientist of Ukraine.
Review Procedure
-
Preliminary Check
Upon submission, the Editorial Board reviews the manuscript for compliance with formal requirements (journal scope, article length, abstract content, reference list formatting, stylistic and grammatical accuracy, and adherence to scientific style).
The manuscript is also checked for plagiarism using the Unicheck anti-plagiarism system in accordance with Ukrainian law on higher education, education, and copyright. Authors are responsible for any detected plagiarism.
If the manuscript passes the preliminary check, it proceeds to peer review. If deficiencies are found, the manuscript may be rejected or returned to the author for revision according to the journal’s Author Guidelines. The date of resubmission is considered the official submission date.
-
Reviewer Evaluation
Reviewers assess the manuscript according to the following criteria:
-
Relevance of the title to the content;
-
Article length and scope;
-
Relevance and novelty of the research problem;
-
Alignment with the journal’s scope;
-
Scientific novelty;
-
Structural clarity;
-
Theoretical and practical significance;
-
Completeness in addressing the stated objectives;
-
Validity of conclusions;
-
Accuracy of references, including citations of relevant works;
-
Compliance with ethical standards and the author’s contribution to the work.
The reviewer completes a standard review form and recommends one of the following:
-
Accept for publication;
-
Return to the author for revision and further review;
-
Reject the manuscript.
Reviewers must provide a written explanation supporting their recommendation and submit the completed review within two weeks, signed either traditionally or with a digital signature.
-
Editorial Board Decision
The Editorial Secretary presents the reviewed manuscript to the Editorial Board, which meets once a month. The Board votes to:
-
Approve the article for publication without changes;
-
Return the article to the author for revision and re-review;
-
Reject the manuscript.
The Editorial Board’s decisions are made collegially. Authors receive the decision in writing. For revisions, the author listed first receives the review form with specific recommendations, with reviewer identities removed.
Revised manuscripts are resubmitted for re-review. If a manuscript fails the second review, it is rejected and no further consideration is given. The editorial office does not enter into discussions with authors of rejected manuscripts.
All reviews are archived for a minimum of three years from the publication date of the issue in which the manuscript appears.
Further processing of accepted manuscripts is conducted by the journal’s editorial and publishing team according to the standard production workflow.