1. All articles, submitted to the editorial board of the Journal and corresponding to its objectives, policy, subject-matter and requirements, must undergo a peer review process.
2. Peer review is done in a form of a double-blind peer review(neither the author nor the reviewer knows about each other).
3. Journal’s editorial staff register the article, date of receipt, title, full name of the author(s) and place of work.
4. Within 7 days the executive secretary informs the author(s) that the article was received.
5. The executive secretary determines the compliance of the article with the journal’s specialization and design requirements, which are posted on the website of the the Journal. If not compliant, the article is not allowed to go thought the rest of the process.
6. The editor-in-chief passes the article to be reviewed to a member of the editorial board or another specialist, whose specialization is the closest to the subject-matter of the article. Following DOAJ recommendations, all articles go through at least two reviewers.
7. The review period lasts from 4 to 8 weeks from the date of receipt.
8. A review must include the following parts and characteristics:

- new and relevant object and subject of the research;

- relevant research goal and objectives;

- reliable and sufficient materials;

- thorough theoretical part of the work;

- the practical part of the work is laid out logically, consistently, well-illustrated;

- the abstract describes the content of the work and complies with the design requirements;

- availability of all necessary structural elements of work;

- compliance of the list of used sources in Ukrainian and English with the existing requirements;

- conclusion about the possibility of publishing this manuscript in the journal: “recommended”, “recommended with the corrections” or “not recommended”.

9. The reviewer decides on the relevance of the publication, the necessity to amend the manuscript, or the irrelevance of the publication. The review must have reviewer’s signature, position, scientific degree and title.
10. Reviewers are notified that the manuscripts sent to the Journal are the author’s private property and are not subject to disclosure. Reviewers are prohibited to make copies of the articles for their own needs.
11. If the article needs completion, it is sent to the author with a proposal to take into account the remarks of the reviewer. In case of rejection, the editors send a reasoned refusal to the author.
12. Manuscripts, amended by the author, are repeatedly sent to the same reviewer who made critical remarks, or to another one at the discretion of the editor-in-chief.
13. Manuscripts, whose authors have not removed the drawbacks pointed out by the reviewer or have not provided their well-reasoned refutation, are not accepted for publication.
14. The final decision about the possibility and relevance of publication is taken by the editor-in-chief (or a member of the editorial board on behalf of the editor-in-chief), and, if necessary, by the editorial board as a whole.
15. According to the provisions on prevention and detection of academic plagiarism in scientific and educational works of the employees and students of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, before submitting the Journal for consideration of the academic council of the department, the editorial board must check the received articles for academic plagiarism and then issue a certificate thereof signed by the editor-in-chief.