Peer review process
The review should contain a qualified analysis, an objective reasoned evaluation and reasonable recommendations for the material of the article.
Law & Digital Technologies uses double-blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process.
Firstly, the editor-in-chief checks that the article corresponds to the subject matter of the journal, its originality and relevance. Otherwise, the article may be rejected without further consideration.
After that, the article is subjected to a preliminary internal review when the editorial board checks the text for plagiarism and self-citation.
The editor sends out a request for review to specialists qualified in the topic. Invitations are sent out until two candidates agree to give a review.
Potential reviewers accept or decline the invitation. If declined, they may suggest alternative reviewers. If agreed, the reviewers proceed to the article.
The period of reviewing is not more than 1 month but can be extended by the reviewer. After reviewing the article, the reviewer gives the final conclusion about the publication of the article:
- the article is recommended for publication in its present form;
- the article is recommended for publication after revising ;
- the article is not recommended for publication in the journal.
The revised article is resubmitted for review. The editorial board withdraws the article from consideration if the author does not send a revised article within 2 months. If the author refuses to revise the article, they should notify the editorial board about the decision.
An article not recommended for publication will not be accepted for reconsideration. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. In any conflict situations, the editor-in-chief makes the final decision. After the editorial board makes a decision on the admission of the article for publication, the editorial board informs the author about it.