Peer Review Process

Peer review plays a vital role in the publication of scientific journals by assessing the validity, quality, and originality of submitted manuscripts.

The purpose of the review process is to uphold quality standards for author manuscripts and to ensure their alignment with the journal's scope and the subject matter of organizational and economic psychology.

The journal follows a double-blind (anonymous) peer review policy: authors are not informed of the reviewers' identities, and reviewers are not informed of the authors' identities. All interaction between reviewers and authors takes place exclusively through authorized members of the editorial board (managing editors).

In certain cases (as determined by the editorial board), single-blind review may be permitted — where the reviewer knows the author's name but the author does not know the reviewer's name — if this is deemed likely to improve the manuscript and facilitate scholarly communication.

Key Stages of the Editorial Process

1. Initial screening. All submitted manuscripts undergo a preliminary check for relevance to the journal's scope, topicality, and social significance, as well as compliance with structural and formatting requirements for the manuscript and references. At this stage, manuscripts are also checked for plagiarism. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements are rejected at this stage.

2. Assignment of a managing editor. If the manuscript meets the journal's requirements, the editor-in-chief (or deputy editor) assigns a managing editor from among the members of the editorial board or editorial council responsible for the relevant research area. The managing editor may proceed to review the manuscript independently or send it for double-blind peer review by two external reviewers.

3. Selection of reviewers. Manuscripts are evaluated by recognized domestic and international experts in the fields of organizational and economic psychology with substantial experience in research, analytical, and expert work in these areas.

4. Preparation of the review. Upon accepting the invitation, the reviewer evaluates the manuscript and prepares a written review addressing the following aspects: relevance of the research, social significance, scientific and practical value, appropriateness of the research methods, and scientific rigor and validity of the conclusions drawn (see the Review Form).

5. Editorial decision. Based on the reviews received, the editorial board makes one of the following decisions:

• a) the manuscript is accepted for publication;
• b) the manuscript is accepted subject to revision in accordance with the reviewers' comments;
• c) the manuscript is rejected.

The editorial office maintains strict confidentiality regarding all manuscripts (content, review process, reviewers' comments, and final decisions), with the exception of the editorial board members, the author(s), and the reviewers themselves.

Additional Review Procedure

Each issue of the journal is recommended for publication by the Academic Council of the Kyiv Institute of Modern Psychology and Psychotherapy. To this end, the full manuscript of each issue undergoes additional review by an independent internal reviewer (Doctor of Science or PhD affiliated with the Institute) and an independent external reviewer (Doctor of Science or PhD specialist in psychology). Information about these reviewers and the Academic Council's recommendation for publication is published in the respective issues of the journal.

Review Form

Publications by the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board Members

To ensure objectivity, impartiality, and adherence to the principles of academic integrity, the journal applies a special procedure for handling manuscripts authored by the editor-in-chief, members of the editorial board, or other individuals involved in the editorial process.

When such manuscripts are submitted:

• The editor-in-chief and/or the editorial board member who is the author or co-author of the manuscript is fully recused from any involvement in the editorial process for that submission (including initial screening, reviewer assignment, and publication decisions).
• To ensure independence, a managing (independent) editor or an editorial board member with no conflict of interest with the authors is appointed.
• Where necessary, the editorial office may engage an external (guest) editor to oversee the full handling of the manuscript.

These practices are consistent with international standards, which require that editors not make decisions on manuscripts in cases of conflict of interest.

Manuscripts authored by editorial board members undergo the standard double-blind peer review procedure with additional safeguards for independence:

• A minimum of two independent reviewers are engaged — reviewers who share no collaborative research, institutional affiliation, or other professional connections with the authors, and who have no potential conflict of interest.
• Reviewers are required to notify the editorial office of any conflict of interest and to decline the review in such cases.
• The editorial office ensures the confidentiality of the review process and the anonymity of all participants.

Decisions regarding the publication of manuscripts authored by editorial board members are made:

• exclusively by the independent editor, on the basis of the peer reviews received;
• in accordance with standard criteria for evaluating scientific quality, originality, and significance of the research;
• without any influence from the author-editor.

The editorial office guarantees that all manuscripts are evaluated solely on the basis of their scientific content, without discrimination or bias.

Conflict of Interest Policy

All participants in the editorial process (authors, editors, and reviewers):

• are required to declare any potential conflicts of interest;
• may not participate in the handling of manuscripts in cases where such conflicts exist;
• must ensure the objectivity, transparency, and integrity of the publication process.