Submissions

REVIEW PROCEDURE

Reviewing (expertise) of manuscripts of scientific articles is carried out in order to maintain the high scientific and theoretical level of the journal "Public Management and Digital Practices" and select the most valuable and relevant scientific works.

The journal "Public Management and Digital Practices" uses double-blind (anonymous) review: the personal data of the author(s) is not disclosed to the reviewer; no personal data of the reviewer is disclosed to the author(s).

Scientific articles submitted to the editorial board are subject to priority control for compliance with the requirements for scientific articles.

The primary expert assessment of a scientific article is carried out by the editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief.

The editorial board determines a reviewer from the editorial board who oversees the relevant scientific direction of the article submitted for publication. In the absence of a curator of the relevant direction, the editorial board appoints an external reviewer for this work. Reviewers (both members of the editorial board and external reviewers) must be well-known experts in the subject of the submitted manuscript and have publications in this field (preferably within the last 5 years).

After reviewing a scientific article, the reviewer concludes:

- the article is recommended for publication;
- the article is recommended for publication after its revision by the author taking into account the comments made;
- the article is not recommended for publication.

If the reviewer recommends the article for publication after its revision taking into account the comments or does not recommend the article for publication, the review must indicate the reason for such a decision.

When reviewing, the editorial board recommends using a standard review form developed by the editorial board and posted on the journal website.

The grounds for re-review may be:

- insufficient level of the initial expert opinion;
- acute inconsistency of the provisions set forth in the scientific article.

After reviewing a scientific article, the reviewer concludes:

- the article is recommended for publication;
- the article is recommended for publication after its revision by the author taking into account the comments made;
- the article is not recommended for publication.

If the reviewer recommends the article for publication after its revision taking into account the comments or does not recommend the article for publication, the reason for such a decision must be indicated in the review.

When reviewing, the editorial board recommends using a standard review form developed by the editorial board and posted on the journal's website.

The grounds for re-review may be:

- insufficient level of the initial expert opinion;
- acute inconsistency of the provisions set forth in the scientific article.

RETRACTION PROCEDURE

Retraction (withdrawal) of an article is applied in cases of detection of significant violations of academic integrity or significant scientific errors after publication of the material.

Retraction procedure:

1. Initiation of review - retraction can be initiated by the editorial board, reviewers, authors or third parties by submitting a reasoned application.
2. Fact-checking - the editorial board conducts a comprehensive review of the materials, involving independent experts if necessary.
3. Request for explanations from authors - a request is sent to the author(s) to provide written explanations.
4. Decision-making - based on the results of the review, the editorial board makes a decision on retraction or refusal to apply it.
5. Public notification - in the event of a decision on retraction, a corresponding notification is published on the journal website indicating the reasons for the retraction.

REQUIREMENTS FOR DESIGN AND ORDER OF SUBMISSION OF PUBLICATIONS

The volume of the article should be 8-20 pages, including illustrations, tables, graphs, and a list of references.

Margins on all sides – 2.0 cm.
Line spacing – 1 cm.
Font “Times New Roman” – 12 pt.
Paragraph indentation – 0.5 cm.

The text is aligned in width.

References to sources should be made in the text in square brackets with the page numbers indicating the source. For example: [4, p. 345]. The list of sources used is given at the end of the article in the order of citing the sources in accordance with existing standards of bibliographic description or alphabetically.

Example of article design

INFORMATION ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF MONEY ESTABLISHED BY THE PUBLICATION, WHICH THE AUTHOR OR AN ORGANIZATION AFFILIATED TO HIM PAYS FOR PROCESSING, REVIEWING AND PUBLICATION OF THE ARTICLE IN THE PUBLICATION

The cost of publishing an article is:

- 72 UAH/page – for employees and students of the State University of Information and Communication Technologies;

- 102 UAH/page – for external authors who are not employees of the State University of Information and Communication Technologies.

Students of the third level of higher education of the University are exempted from payment (contributions) for processing, reviewing and publishing articles, if they study at the expense of the state budget and the articles were written by them alone (without co-authors).

Payment for the publication of the article is made after its finalization by the author (if necessary) and confirmation by the editorial office that the article meets the requirements for publication in the journal.

A copy of the payment receipt must be sent to the email address: pmdp@ukr.net.

Details for payment for the publication of the article in a periodical
State University of Information and Communication Technologies
EDRPOU 38855349
Bank of the State University of Kyiv
MFI 820172
R/r UA588201720313201003202086638

Purpose of payment: for placing the article in the journal (indicate the name of the journal, surname/surnames and initials of the author/authors)

General requirements for submission

Application template for submission

Providing information about the authors

Examples of the design of the bibliographic description