Editional Policy

Papers should be prepared in accordance with the rules for preparation of manuscripts.

First, it is checked whether all incoming papers fit the scope of the Journal. If the paper does not fall within the scope of the Journal, it will not be accepted and the author will be promptly informed about this by a letter explaining the reasons for the rejection.

Papers, which fit in the scope of the Journal, are added to the database and assigned registration numbers.

The authors are informed by a special letter about the registration number of their papers and if the set of accompanying documents is not complete, the authors are requested by the Editorial Board to provide all necessary materials.

Every incoming manuscript is subject to reviewing. The reviews are conducted by respected researchers and specialists.

Each paper is assessed by at least two reviewers. The reviewers are selected by members of the Editorial Board taking into account the professional interests of the reviewer and doing their best to avoid the possible «conflict of interest». Reviews in the Radiation biology. Radioecology are one-sided «blind» (the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers). In exceptional cases when the reviewer is willing to inform the author about his identity, this information is disclosed to the author.

The experts are allowed two weeks for the review. Should there be a delay with the answer, the due inquiry is made to the reviewer. If the delay is significant or if the assigned reviewer refuses to review the manuscript, another reviewer is selected.

After the manuscript has been assessed by two reviewers, the situations can be as follows:

  • Both reviewers recommend acceptance without revision.
    Then the paper is included in the list for the approval by the Editorial Board at its nearest meeting and is subsequently scheduled for publication.
  • Both reviewers recommend acceptance after revision.
    Reviews are sent to the authors for revision with a request to highlight all changes in the text by color and answer to the comments of every reviewer is separate files. The corrections should be approved by the reviewers and the revised version subsequently is to be approved by the Editorial Board at its meeting.
  • One reviewer recommends acceptance without revision, the other reviewer recommends acceptance with some revision.
    Both reviews are sent to the authors. The authors are to revise the paper following the recommendations of only one reviewer and the answer is to be directed only to one reviewer. After the second reviewer has approved the revised version, the paper is submitted to the meeting of the Editorial Board for approval.
  • One reviewer recommend acceptance with some revision, the other reviewer recommends rejecting the paper.
    In this complicated case, the manuscript and all accompanying materials as well as submitted reviews are carefully studied either by the Editor-in-Chief, or by the Deputy Editor-in-Chief, or by a specially assigned duly competent member of the Editorial Board. This detailed consideration results in a substantiated decision about the paper. If revision is recommended, the authors are informed about it by a special letter. If the revision does not appear expedient, the authors are informed about it by a letter from the Deputy Editor-in-Chief with a substantiated rejection.
  • Both reviewers recommend the rejection of the paper.
    The authors are sent the both reviews and the letter of rejection.

All papers recommended for publication by the reviewers are submitted for approval by the meeting of the Editorial Board. Each paper is presented at the meeting by one member of the Editorial Board who either has participated in reviewing of the paper or is a specialist in the relevant field.

The final decision about the acceptance of the paper or its rejection is made by the Editorial Board.

The Editorial Board and the editorial staff of Thermal Engineering adhere to standards of academic ethics, protect the reputation of the authors, and take seriously all cases of plagiarism. Accusations of plagiarism can undermine the researcher's career. In the event of such a situation, there is a system of procedures making it possible to respond to possible allegations of plagiarism.

Current Issue

FAQs

When should a copyright agreement be submitted?

Agreement as pdf file signed by all co-authors must be submitted by e-mail together with all materials of the article. Original hard copies of the agreement (two copies) must be sent by post to the address of the Editorial Board.

Must the original files of illustrations be submitted along with the manuscript?

Yes, by all means. The original of an illustration is the file of illustration in its original format. Photographs should best be submitted in tiff format with the resolution at least 300 dpi.

all questions