Article Consideration Procedure

Manuscripts are accepted continuously throughout the year.

1. The principal author (corresponding author) registers on the journal’s electronic portal and uploads materials in the form of two files, one of which must not contain any information about the authors (full name, place of work, author details). The manuscript submitted by the author is forwarded to the journal’s editorial office. The technical secretary checks the manuscript for compliance with the technical requirements according to the template (Appendix 1). Along with the manuscript, the author submits a cover letter confirming the independent nature of the submitted work, consent for plagiarism checking, inclusion in various databases and information systems (including full-text versions if published), and granting exclusive rights to the publisher.
2. The technical secretary checks the manuscript for originality through a licensed automatic plagiarism detection system (https://antiplagiat.enu.kz/). A complete electronic report is generated based on the plagiarism check results. Articles that do not receive a satisfactory result (minimum originality threshold — 70%) are not allowed for further consideration. Electronic reports on plagiarism checking are not provided to authors.
   
   Previously published articles, their translations into other languages (Kazakh, Russian, English, etc.), as well as articles submitted for review to other journals (publications), are not accepted for consideration. The technical secretary informs the principal/corresponding author of this decision. If the article is rejected, the editorial office reserves the right not to discuss the reasons for rejection.
   
   The technical secretary sends articles that have passed the required originality threshold to the editor-in-chief (or the responsible editor for the subject area). The editor-in-chief reviews the article for compliance with the journal’s thematic scope. In case of non-compliance, the editorial office sends the author an email with a justification for refusal.
3. The editor-in-chief (or responsible subject editor) appoints two reviewers (a scientist or specialist in the relevant field) for each manuscript that has passed the initial screening. This procedure is carried out through the OJS (Open Journal System).
4. The technical secretary sends the manuscript and the full plagiarism report to the reviewer to determine the possibility of publishing the article in the journal.
5. The journal uses a double-blind peer review procedure: the names of reviewers and authors are not disclosed. Within 30 working days from receiving the manuscript, the reviewer submits a reasoned review assessing the relevance of the topic, the author's contribution to the scientific field, and the theoretical and practical significance of the results. All reviews contain a recommendation: publish (with or without revisions) or reject. All reviews are sent back to the editorial office.
   
   If a revision is required, the author must provide a corrected version of the article as soon as possible. The revision process must not exceed two weeks from the date the authors receive the email requesting changes. In response to reviewers’ comments, the author must submit:
   (1) an edited version of the article with all corrections clearly marked;
   (2) a detailed response to each reviewer comment. The edited article and authors’ response are then sent back to the reviewer for reconsideration. This process repeats until the reviewer makes a final decision.
   
   If the reviewer’s comments are accepted but corrections are not applied conscientiously (e.g., after the third submission without addressing the issues), the manuscript is rejected. If the authors disagree with the reviewer’s comments, they may send a justified appeal to the editor-in-chief, who decides whether to reconsider or reject the article.
   
   If the authors do not return the revised version within two weeks after receiving the review (even without an explicit refusal), the editorial office has the right to remove the manuscript from consideration. Authors are notified accordingly.
   
   All reviews and the editorial board’s final decision are sent to the principal/corresponding author indicated in the metadata during submission. All article materials (final version, reviews, plagiarism report, and other documents, if any) are submitted for discussion at an editorial board meeting. The editorial board decides whether the article can be published based on reviewers’ conclusions. The executive secretary records meeting minutes. Articles with negative reviews and rejected by the editorial board are not reconsidered. In controversial cases, the editor-in-chief makes the final decision.
6. Publication is carried out in the general queue as soon as materials are ready. The editorial office may form the queue according to the thematic sections of upcoming issues.
7. After determining the content of the issue, the executive secretary organises proofreading of article texts (Kazakh, Russian, and English), layout preparation, and journal printing.

Editorial Process

1. Checking the manuscript for format compliance and plagiarism
2. Initial evaluation by the editor
3. Assigning reviewers
4. Receiving reviewers’ comments
5. Editor’s decision
6. Rejected / Returned for revision / Accepted
7. Preparing the accepted article for publication (in order)
8. Publication (in order)