Alma Mater
ISSN 1026-955X
Vestnik Vysshey Shkoly (Higher School Herald)
The best way to learn all about Higher Education


Peer review as an important aspect of academic publication

E.V. Osokina, E.P. Turbina
80,00 ₽

UDC 001.89  


E.V. Osokina is Cand.Sci. (Pedagogy), doc. e-mail:; and E.P. Turbina is Cand.Sci. (Pedagogy), doc. e-mail: at Shadrinsk State Pedagogical University


Analyzed is the problem of peer review as an important aspect of academic publication. Being a central part of academic publication, peer review is rarely recognized as an important part of academic work. Nowadays, peer-reviewing has become one of the most enigmatic and disputable academic work, causing an ambiguous attitude of many scientists (both reviewers and authors). The urgency of the research is due to fundamental changes in Russian and foreign scientific periodicals, which have taken place in recent years, as well as the necessity of scientific journal to meet all modern requirements. The article examines the past and the future of peer-reviewed scientific publications. The authors have made an attempt to analyze ethical standards of reviewing. The article reviews the main historical and modern problems associated with identity, diversity, anonymity and the reviewing process. The article also deals with the power of editors and reviewers in academic publication. The authors stress educational value of reviewing for both authors and editors. Peer review may be useful for both authors and reviewers, but it is possible to note the negative aspect of peer review. It has become intelligible to teach new scientists in skills to process and interpret the reviews, as well as participate in peer reviewing, which may be the subject of new study on methodological aspects of teaching graduate students and applicants for scientific degrees in the field of scientific peer review.

Key words: evaluation of scientific publication, peer review, evaluation, quality, scientific publications.




  1. The Great Soviet Encyclopedia. Vol. 22. Moscow, 1978. P. 68.
  2. Milchin, A.E. Publishing Dictionary. Moscow, 2006.
  3. Ozhegov, S.I., Explanatory Russian language dictionary. Moscow, 1999. P. 678.
  4. Petrosyan, A.E. Braking mechanism (expert evaluation of scientific results as a factor in restraining conceptual innovations). URL:
  5. Peters, M.A. Editorial interview. URL:
  6. Stewart, G. Reviewing and ethics in the online academy (guest editorial). Educational Philosophy and Theory. 2016. No. 48 (5). P. 437–442.
  7. Winston, J. Open peer review could result in better quality of peer review. URL: