General Information

This journal subjects all submitted scientific articles to an independent peer review process prior to publication. The main purpose of the editorial office is to ensure publication quality, scientific integrity, and fair evaluation.

Type of Peer Review

Open peer review. The current OJS default is open review, and 87 of 91 recorded review assignments use this method. The journal must not be described as double-blind. Reviewer reports are confidential editorial records and are not claimed to be published publicly.

Stages of the Peer Review Process

Submission → Initial Editorial Screening → Plagiarism Screening → Peer Review → Author Revision → Editorial Decision → Copyediting → Publication

1. Initial screening: an editor checks scope, completeness, format and basic ethical requirements and may decline an unsuitable manuscript without external review.
2. Plagiarism screening: available similarity tools and editorial assessment are used before or during review. A score alone is not a finding.
3. Reviewer selection and review: the editor selects an independent subject expert. OJS has no fixed minimum configured; current records normally show one reviewer per active round. Additional reviewers may be invited when expertise, disagreement or integrity concerns require them.
4. Revision: authors answer comments point by point and mark changes; a revision may return to the reviewer.
5. Decision: reviewers advise; the authorised editor makes the final accept, revise, resubmit or reject decision.
6. Production: only accepted work proceeds to copyediting and publication. A stage may repeat, and not every submission reaches every stage.

Decision Types

Possible outcomes are acceptance, minor revision, major revision/resubmission, or rejection. Reviewer recommendations do not bind the editor. The final editorial decision considers the reports, author response, manuscript quality, ethics, scope and conflicts; reasons are communicated as confidentiality permits.

Review Timeframe

OJS currently sets a two-week reviewer due interval, but this is a workflow target, not a guaranteed publication time. Additional reviewers, revisions and editorial checks may extend the process; no universal 4–8 week promise is made.

Ethics, Conflict of Interest, and Confidentiality

Even under open review, an unpublished manuscript and review correspondence remain confidential and must not be shared or uploaded to an unauthorised AI service. Reviewers and editors must disclose relevant personal, professional, academic or financial conflicts and decline or step aside when impartiality may be affected.

Plagiarism and Originality Screening

Every submitted manuscript is checked through Milliy Antiplag before peer review. The service is available through the OJS integration and the Virtual Assistant @kmurojaat_livebot, but editorial staff start each check manually; submission itself does not trigger an automatic decision. The bot forwards material to the editorial office, while direct bot-to-OJS integration is planned and is not yet operational. The editor evaluates the report in context; similarity or an AI-detector result alone does not prove misconduct or determine acceptance.

Editorial Board and Reviewers

Editors select reviewers for subject expertise, independence, availability and absence of relevant conflicts; author suggestions are advisory only. Reviewers must assess originality, methods, evidence, results, references, ethics and clarity; provide specific, respectful and timely reasons; protect confidentiality; cite relevant literature without coercion; disclose conflicts; avoid personal criticism; and report suspected misconduct. They recommend an outcome but do not make the final decision.

Corrections, Errata, and Retractions

If an error is identified after publication, the editorial office will issue an erratum, corrigendum, or, when necessary, a retraction. These procedures are conducted in accordance with COPE guidelines.

Complaints and Appeals

Authors may submit a written appeal if they disagree with a review decision or editorial decision. All appeals are independently reassessed by the editorial office.

Contact

To contact the editorial office:
Email: admin@srt-journal.uz
Phone: +998 90 673 6433