Peer-review process

Problems of Tribology applies a double-blind peer review procedure, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are mutually concealed. Manuscripts are evaluated by independent experts in the relevant field to ensure the scientific quality, objectivity, and reliability of published materials.

Preliminary Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial screening to assess its compliance with the journal’s aims and scope, formatting requirements, scientific style, and article structure, as well as a plagiarism check. Based on the results of this screening, the manuscript may be rejected, returned to the authors for revision, or forwarded for peer review. If a manuscript is returned for revision at the preliminary editorial screening stage, the date of resubmission is considered the submission date.

Selection of Reviewers

Each manuscript that successfully passes the preliminary editorial screening is normally sent to at least two independent reviewers. Reviewers are selected from Ukrainian and international researchers who have relevant publications and demonstrated expertise in the subject area of the submitted manuscript. Preference is given to experts who have recently published in journals indexed in international scientometric databases, including Scopus or Web of Science, or who are authors of monographs in the relevant field.

Reviewers are selected based on their subject expertise, scientific independence, and absence of conflicts of interest. All reviewers are expected to comply with the ethical principles and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Organization of the Peer Review Process

Before a manuscript is sent for peer review, information that may identify the authors is removed. Each reviewer receives an anonymized version of the manuscript and the journal’s standard review form. The peer review process is confidential, and the anonymity of reviewers is ensured by the Editorial Board.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts independently of each other. If there is a substantial disagreement between the recommendations of the two reviewers, the Editorial Board may invite a third independent reviewer. The final decision is made by the Editorial Board taking into account all reviews received.

Manuscript Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts according to the following main criteria:

– relevance to the aims and scope of the journal;
– relevance and scientific novelty of the research;
– completeness and quality of the analysis of current scientific literature;
– validity and appropriateness of the methodology;
– reliability of the results obtained;
– validity and consistency of the conclusions;
– compliance with the principles of academic integrity and appropriate citation practices;
– presence and clarity of the individual contribution of the author(s).

Review Period and Review Form

Reviews are prepared using the standard form established by the Editorial Board and are normally submitted within two weeks of receipt of the manuscript. Each reviewer provides a reasoned assessment and selects one of the following recommendations:

– accept for publication;
– revise and resubmit for further review;
– reject.

Editorial Decision

The final decision regarding publication is made by the Editorial Board on the basis of the reviews received and consideration of the manuscript at an editorial meeting. Possible decisions are: accept for publication, request revision, or reject.

If revision is required, the reviewers’ comments are forwarded to the authors without disclosing the reviewers’ identities. The revised manuscript may be sent for another round of peer review when necessary. In the event of a repeated negative evaluation, the manuscript may be rejected by the Editorial Board.

Documentation and Retention of Review Materials

Reviews are prepared in written form, including electronic form, and may be signed electronically. Reviews and related materials are retained by the Editorial Office for at least three years. The editorial decision, together with the reviewers’ reports or comments, is communicated to the authors without disclosing the reviewers’ personal information.

Confidentiality and Communication

The Editorial Board ensures the confidentiality of all stages of the peer review process. Manuscripts, reviewers’ reports, and other materials related to peer review are not disclosed to third parties, and reviewers’ identities are not revealed to the authors.

Authors may provide a reasoned response to reviewers’ comments when submitting a revised manuscript. The final decision to accept or reject a manuscript rests with the Editorial Board of Problems of Tribology.