The editorial board of the journal «Actual problems of innovation economy and law» is guided by international standards of ethics for scientific publications, in particular the COPE Code of Conduct. To ensure high quality of materials, all manuscripts undergo a two-level review: independent peer review and evaluation by the editorial board based on objectivity.
We reserve the right to literary editing, while maintaining the authenticity of the author’s opinion (substantive changes are made exclusively with the consent of the author). The editorial board reserves the right to reject materials that do not meet the profile of the publication. Please note that the responsibility for the accuracy of facts and citations lies with the authors; their views may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.
Articles submitted to the scientific journal «Actual problems of innovation economy and law» undergo internal, anonymous review by both the reviewer and the author to improve the quality of the articles published in the journal. Double “blind” review ensures the objectivity and impartiality of the expert assessment provided.
Reviewers are members of the editorial board and invited experts with relevant work in the subject area.
During the review process, experts assess the manuscript comprehensively against a few key criteria. In particular, the correspondence of the chosen topic to the publication’s scientific profile, its relevance, and its practical significance for the industry are analyzed. Special attention is paid to the logic and persuasiveness of scientific argumentation, methodological correctness of the presentation of results, as well as the correspondence of the content of the article to its title, annotation, and keywords.
Reviewers assess the degree of achievement of the set goals and the completeness of the conclusions, which should clearly illustrate the study’s results. Important aspects include the availability of recommendations for further research, the quality and appropriateness of the cited sources (at least 8), and the author’s compliance with the language standards and technical requirements of the Instructions for Authors.
Articles that fully meet the established requirements for articles submitted to the all-Ukrainian scientific journal «Actual problems of innovation economy and law» are accepted for review. Only those articles that are valuable from a scientific point of view and contribute to solving current problems and tasks are accepted for publication. Articles are not accepted by the editorial board in cases of: complete or partial lack of contact information; non-compliance of the article design with the established requirements; lack of review by a Doctor of Sciences; lack of UDC; insufficient volume of the article or annotation; insufficient number of literary sources.
For all scientific articles submitted for review, the level of uniqueness of the author’s text is determined using appropriate software (Plag program), which shows the article’s uniqueness, the sources used, and partial text coincidences.
By submitting a manuscript to the editorial office of the journal, authors entrust the editors with the results of their scientific work and creative efforts, on which their reputation and career may depend. Disclosure of the confidentiality of the manuscript review violates the author’s rights. Editors do not disclose information regarding the manuscript (including information about its receipt, content, review process, critical comments of reviewers, and conclusion) to anyone except the authors and reviewers themselves. Violation of confidentiality is possible only in cases involving a statement of the unreliability or falsification of materials; in all other cases, its preservation is mandatory.
Responsibility for violation of copyright and non-compliance with existing standards in the materials of the article lies with the author of the article. Responsibility for the reliability of the facts and data provided, the validity of the conclusions and recommendations made, and the scientific and practical level of the article lies with the author and reviewer.
The decision to publish is made by the editorial board. Editorial changes may be made to the materials without the consent of the author(s). Manuscripts rejected by the editorial board are not returned to the authors and are not reviewed.
The process of reviewing manuscripts in the journal begins with a preliminary review stage, which lasts up to 14 days and involves a thorough check of the article for compliance with the thematic profile, adherence to design, requirements, and adherence to the principles of academic integrity through a plagiarism check. The next step is an independent review, which takes 2 to 4 weeks and consists of a professional assessment of the material by leading experts. After this, the editorial board decides whether to accept the article, send it for revision (with the possibility of re-review), or reject it. If corrections are necessary, the author submits a corrected version of the manuscript along with responses to comments, and the final verdict on the publication of the material in the issue is made by the editor-in-chief.
The appeal and final preparation policy provides for the author’s right to appeal the editorial decision by filing an appeal within 5 working days, after which the manuscript is transferred for independent review to a member of the editorial board who has not previously been involved in the evaluation of this work. All articles accepted for publication undergo editorial review; however, the editorial board reserves the right to refuse publication at the final stage if the author has made improper revisions or significant changes to the text without approval and repeated review. The decision to accept the publication for publication is made by the editorial board of the journal based on the review results.
