All submitted manuscripts are checked for their correspondence with the themes and formal requirements of the journal. All scientific articles submitted to the editorial office of the "Shagi / Steps" journal undergo mandatory one-sided anonymous "blind" reviewing (the authors of the manuscript do not know the reviewers). At the request of the reviewer, their name may be revealed to the author.

At least two independent experts are selected by the editors amongst those having previous experience in the subject area. Most papers are reviewed by two reviewers. A third reviewer may be invited in case the two previous reviews contradict each other. When choosing a reviewer, the editors are guided by the expertise of the reviewer and the absence of professional relationships between the author and the reviewer.

When submitting an article for review, authors may indicate a list of individuals with whom they have a conflict of interest, whether due to competition or collaboration. The editorial team will take this information into consideration when selecting reviewers to ensure impartiality and fairness in the review process.

Only manuscripts complying with the style sheet published on the journal’s website will be considered. There is no fee for review of a submission.

Expert evaluation of submitted articles goes through the following stages:

1. Preliminary consideration of submissions is carried out by the Editorial Team. At this point, the decision to reject a submission may be taken jointly by members of the Editorial Team responsible for the sections of the journal and by the Editor-in-Chief. A submission might be turned down if it does not fit within the range of core subjects featured in the journal or if its scholarly quality is judged inadequate. In a case of incompatibility with the journal’s requirements, the Editorial Team will notify the author by email regarding the rejection of the submission. In some cases, the Editorial Team may propose that the author revise and resubmit the manuscript.

2. Expert evaluation is carried out on the basis of a single-blind peer review system (the reviewer’s name is concealed from the author). Reviews may be written in Russian or in English, and choice of format is left to the reviewer (see the guideline). In cases of significant differences in judgment between the reviewers and the Editorial Team, or if an author challenges a review in a substantive and professional manner, the Editorial Team arranges for a new review and takes into account opinions of all members of the Editorial Board. The Editorial Team notifies the author by email regarding their decision.

In evaluating a manuscript, reviewers are asked to bear in mind the following criteria:

• the submission’s compatibility with the journal’s scope;
• its theoretical and methodological adequacy;
  
• the data sufficiency and reliability of its sources;
  
• its analytical accuracy.
  

The review process is carried out in accordance with the Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement.

The following types of submissions are peer-reviewed: articles, short communications, including reports of expeditions. Other submissions, such as source publication, translations, conference reports, book reviews, obituaries, etc. usually are not peer-reviewed, although they are evaluated by the Editors.

Depending on the results of the review process, the Editors may make an initial decision to accept a manuscript for publication without revisions, to accept it subject to substantive revisions, or to reject it. Within two months of submitting a manuscript, the author receives a formal response regarding the possibility of publication in the journal; the author may also receive a list of revisions required for final acceptance for publication.

A positive review is a necessary but not sufficient condition for publication. The editorial board makes the final decision.

3. If the decision is to accept subject to substantive revisions, the author is requested to make the necessary changes as quickly as possible and to resubmit. Usually, the revised manuscript will be seen by the original reviewers.

The final decision on the possibility of publishing the article is made by the editor-in-chief of the journal, guided by the opinion of the reviewers and members of the editorial board.

Once an article is accepted, it undergoes literary and scholarly editing. Once this process has been completed, the author receives a copy of the edited manuscript for review and authorization.

The author must confirm by email that the article may be published in the final edited form. Where multiple authors are involved, consent is given by the author charged with correspondence with the Editorial Team.

If a submitted manuscript is rejected, the Editorial Team provides the author with the reasons for this decision. However, the identity of the reviewers is kept confidential and full texts of the reviews are never sent to authors. If a manuscript is rejected at any stage of the process, the author is free to submit it to another journal.

The reasons for rejecting a manuscript are as follows:

• plagiarism, uncovered by the reviewer or by the Editorial Team (without right to revise the manuscript);
• the theme of the article is not connected to the scholarly specialization of the journal;
  
• the author’s refusal to carry out technical revisions of correct the article, if it is not appropriately formatted;
  
• the author’s refusal to revise the manuscript in accordance with the reviewers’ recommendations.