Peer Review Process

The review process in the journal "Mechanics and Advanced Technologiesis double-blind which ensures that every submission goes through a similar and unbiased review when the authors and the reviewer’s identities are kept undisclosed from each other.

When assigned a new submission, the associate editor checks the one for its completeness and adherence to the Guide for Authors. Our journal will first check the plagiarism of a manuscript by using UniCheck after it is submitted. The high level of similarity could cause the manuscript rejection (we read the whole paper and check which part is taken from other papers).

After the review process, if the paper is accepted for publication, the author gets notified by the editorial board via provided email. The author then needs to fill in a review form containing final recommendations.

If a reviewer indicates that some parts of the manuscript need to be amended, the article is sent back to the author with a suggestion to account for the reviewer comments and resubmit the amended manuscript or to provide a reasoned disagreement with the reviewer’s comments. The amended manuscript should be resubmitted along with a letter from the author containing the responses to all the reviewer’s comments and explanations to all the changes made in the original manuscript. The amended manuscript with the letter is then sent to the reviewer for analysis. The reviewer then makes a final decision on the possibility to publish the amended paper. The date of the acceptance for publication is the date when the editorial board receives a consent from the reviewer for publication or the date when the editorial board makes a decision to publish the paper.

In the case of disagreement with the reviewer’s comments, the author can provide reasoned objections to the editorial board. In this case, the paper will be considered at the session of the editorial board. The editorial board may require the manuscript to be additionally reviewed by another reviewer. The editorial board reserves the right to refuse the publication of the research paper if the author fails to account account for all the comments of the reviewer. In response to reviewer's request, the editorial board may send the manuscript for a review by another specialist adhering to the double-blind review standards.

The final decision on the publication of the manuscript is made by the editor in chief or by an authorised member of editorial board. In special cases, the decision may be made by voting of all members of the editorial board. After the decision has been made, the author is notified via email and is informed about the approximate date of publication.

In case of a positive decision, the submission is redirected to the manuscript in editor’s hand and then gets published according to the queue. In certain specific cases, the manuscript may be published on demand of editor in chief in the next journal issue.

The content of each journal issue is consolidated on each session of the academic board of MMI. This is noted on a corresponding page of each issue.

The manuscript accepted for publication may be further edited by the technical editor. Minor changes of a stylistic and/or formal character may be performed at this stage. These changes will not, in any case, affect the content of the paper and are typically performed without notifying the author. If the author requests so the final preprint edition of the paper may be coordinated with him/her.

The author bares all the responsibility for violating the copyright and/or any other existing codes practices and standards mandatory in his/her field. The responsibility for the research integrity, the validity of conclusions and the level of scientific and technical applicability is shared by the author and the reviewer.

Handling papers from editorial board members

Editorial members can submit their works with the prospect of their publication in the journal. This is a potential conflict of interest, especially in cases where the manuscript is submitted by the decision-maker.

During the review, such members of the editorial board will not participate in the selection of reviewers and the decision-making process for the manuscript. The review and adoption process will be controlled by a senior editor, independent of other editors. In some cases, the review process will be conducted by external independent experts to minimize possible bias in the evaluation of manuscripts submitted by members of the editorial board.

To ensure transparent and fair handling of these manuscripts, the following principles will be applied to them:

(1) The manuscripts of the members of the editorial board will be subject to double blind review, and members of the editorial board will not have access to information regarding their works, except for those available to all authors.

(2) Member(s) of the editorial board manuscripts will be reviewed by a minimum of two external peer reviewers.

(3) Member(s) of the editorial board manuscripts are treated as all submissions to the journal and may be subject to the full range of editorial decisions: reject without peer review, multiple revisions, reject after revision and/or accept.

(4) If accepted, member(s) of the editorial board manuscripts will carry a note to the reader showing how transparent the reviewing process had been.