REGULATIONS
for reviewing manuscripts of scientific articles
in the magazine Music: Art, Science, Practice

1. All materials are submitted to the journal editorial board for preliminary
consideration and checked for correctness of citation and degree of originality in
the Anti-plagiarism system. The review period is up to 30 days. A material may
not be allowed to be published before reviewing in case of discrepancies in its
subject matter with the journal’s profile, insufficient or exceeded volume, noncompliance with the layout rules, negligence in presentation, a large number of
grammatical errors, as well as low text originality and incorrect borrowing.

2. The author must provide to the editorial board one copy of the article read
and signed by the author (co-authors), information about the author(s) in the form
of a filled out questionnaire, a cover letter, an abstract in Russian and English,
keywords in Russian and English, summaries in Russian and English, electronic
version of all documents on electronic medium or by e-mail addressed to
kazmusicasp@gmail.com

3. Materials that have successfully passed the preliminary checking are
subject to mandatory review. Reviewing the manuscripts of scientific articles in the
editorial office of the magazine Music: Art, Science, Practice is carried out to
maintain a high scientific and theoretical level of the publication and select the
most valuable and relevant materials. The review is carried out by experts on the
subject who have publications on the subject of the article under review, members
of the editorial board/editorial committee, or other reputable scientists
collaborating with the editors of the journal, but not the supervisors of their
students’ work.

4. All scientific materials submitted to the editors, including authors who do
not have a scientific degree, are subject to mandatory review.

5. The reviewer submits an expert opinion within a month after receiving the
manuscript. The review (expert opinion) should briefly evaluate: - general
scientific level of the work; - title of the article and its compliance with the
content; - relevance of the topic; - scientific novelty, theoretical and practical
significance of presented conclusions; - work structure; - presence of arguable
and/or incorrect provisions; * compliance with reader's interests. In addition, the
review should express the opinion of the reviewer (expert) about the possibility or
impossibility of publishing the manuscript: - in the author’s version; - after
completion of the manuscript (with an indication of the list of defects); - after
editing the manuscript and additional reviewing (indicating the principal directions
of editing).

6. Reviewing the materials submitted to the editors of the magazine Music:
Art, Science, Practice, is carried out in a confidential manner, and the name of the
reviewer(s) is not communicated to the author(s). Also, the reviewer is not
informed about the author(s).

7. Reviews are stored in the publishing house and in the editorial office for
five years. The editorial board informs the authors of the results of the review, and
undertakes sending copies of the reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science
of the Russian Federation upon receipt of the relevant request.

8. If the text requires significant changes, then an updated version of the
article is sent to the same specialists for additional reviewing.
18 … Upon making a positive decision on the issue of publication, the author
and publisher enter into a license agreement.