Peer review

The editorial board of the journal "Theoretical and Experimental Psychology" selects articles for publication from among the submitted manuscripts. Upon acceptance of a manuscript (before the review process begins), the editorial board evaluates its compliance with the journal's thematic focus, article formatting requirements, and originality (using the “Antiplagiat” system). If the manuscript does not meet any of these requirements, it is rejected and not submitted for review. If the initial review is successful, the manuscript is sent for expert evaluation.

General Peer Reviewing Rules

The Journal follows the rules of double «blind» (anonymous) peer review: names of Reviewers are not reported to Authors, and names of Authors of materials under review are not reported to Reviewers. Authors and Reviewers communicate only through the Journal’s editorial staff. Manuscripts rejected as a result of peer review are not re-reviewed. Other articles of the Authors of such manuscripts are accepted for consideration in the usual way.

Terms of Manuscript consideration: The entire review process takes from 15 to 45 calendar days from the date of Manuscript receipt by Editorial Office. Responsibility for compliance with reviewing deadlines and for assessment objectivity lies with Editorial Office and Editorial Board.

Editors do not provide information regarding the Manuscript (including information about its receipt, content, review process, critical comments of Reviewers, and final decision) to anyone except the members of Editorial Board, the Author, and the Reviewers. Reviews are submitted upon request to any of the Editorial Board members, as well as to the Authors and specialized organizations.

Reviews are stored in the Publishing House and its archives for 5 years. Editorial Board undertakes to send copies of Reviews to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation upon receipt of corresponding request by the Editorial Office.

Manuscript Registration and Processing

• The editorial board of the journal "Theoretical and Experimental Psychology" conducts a mandatory double-blind review of all incoming manuscripts that are relevant to the journal's scope and have passed the originality check (using the “Antiplagiat VUZ” system).
• The editorial board appoints several reviewers, usually at least three, to evaluate the manuscript. The Editorial Board, headed by the Editor-in-Chief, makes the decision to select Reviewers.
• Articles are reviewed both by members of the Editorial Board and invited Reviewers - leading Russian and international experts. The selection of three experts is determined by the Editorial Board members, taking into account the subject matter of the submitted materials.
• The double-blind peer review method means that the names of the Reviewers are not disclosed to the Authors, as well as the Reviewers do not know the names of the Authors. Manuscripts are reviewed only in anonymous submission.
• The Editorial Board sets a reviewing deadline of four weeks for Reviewers to consider a manuscript from the date it is submitted for review. Reviewers must consent to the review and agree on a deadline for submitting their review. The review period may be extended if the Reviewer provides the Editorial Board with a justification for the delay in submitting the review.
• If there is a conflict of interest, reviewers are required to notify the Editorial Board and/or Editor-in-Chief and decline to review the manuscript. The journal's Editorial Office will inform reviewers of other provisions regarding responsibility and the need to comply with ethical standards (see the Editorial Ethics and Policy section: https://tepsyj.ru/about/redaktsionnaya-etika/).
• Communication with Reviewers and Authors is carried out through the online Editorial Office.
• The editorial office informs Reviewers that the copyright to the manuscript belongs to the Authors and the information contained therein is not subject to disclosure.
• Reviews are stored at the online Editorial Office of the journal, as well as in the publication's archives, for 5 years and are available upon request from the Editor-In-Chief of the journal, the Authors, the scientific electronic library (elibrary.ru platform), and the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. The Editorial Board undertakes to send copies of reviews to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation upon receipt of a corresponding request.
• The review must be objective and contain an assessment of both the strengths and weaknesses of the scientific work. The review text must be constructive, polite, and free from personal criticism of the Authors.
• The review form is available in the online Editorial Office and structurally and substantively reflects the following points: the article's relevance, scientific novelty, the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript, the accuracy of the results and conclusions, the manuscript's formatting compliance with the Editorial Board's requirements (considering the consistency of the abstract with the article's content, the quality of the cited sources, and the bibliography), and the appropriateness of the statistical analysis methods. At the end of the review, the Reviewers freely draw informed conclusions on the manuscript's content and make recommendations to the Authors. Reviewers may comment on the writing style, correctness, and accuracy of the wording.
• At the end of the reviewing process, the Reviewers make one of three decisions and recommendations: recommend the article for publication without revision, recommend the article for publication after revision, or reject the manuscript.
• The results of the review for each manuscript are discussed by the Editorial Board to make a final decision on the manuscript. The Editors notify the Authors of the Editorial Board's decision based on the reviewing results.
• If the manuscript requires revision and does not meet the criteria specified in the reviewing form, the Authors receive an anonymised review and/or the article with the Reviewers' comments and recommendations for revision.
• As a result of the review, the manuscript must either be accepted or rejected. In 2025, 60% of manuscripts were rejected in the journal compared to 40% of articles that were accepted.
• Manuscripts that were rejected after the review are not reconsidered. If the Author(s) of the rejected article submit another manuscript, it is considered as a new one in the usual manner.
• Articles after revision by the Authors are sent for re-review to the same Reviewers. If Reviewers, for any reason, refuse to re-review the manuscript or are unable to do so within the established deadline, the Editorial Board appoint new reviewers.
• If the Authors refuse to revise the manuscript or do not take into account the Reviewers' constructive comments without providing an explanation, the Editorial Board reserves the right to reject the manuscript by sending the Authors a reasoned refusal to publish their article.
• Authors are given up to 2 months to revise the manuscript. During this time, Authors must submit a manuscript fully revised based on the Reviewers' comments. A response to each comment received, formatted as a table in a separate MS Word file is to be submitted. If there are comments with which the Author(s) disagree, they must also prepare a reasoned response to the Reviewer in the same file.
• The Editorial Board (or its individual members) does not guarantee that the article will be accepted for publication until the reviewing process is complete.
• After the manuscript has passed all stages of reviewing and revision, the Editorial Board, headed by the Editor-in-Chief, makes the final decision on publication.
• Upon the Editorial Board's decision to publish a manuscript and after the Editor-in-Chief has approved the final table of contents for the issue, the Authors are sent information specifying the issue in which the article will be included. Upon request from the Authors, the Editorial Board provides a certificate of acceptance of the article for publication in the established format.
• The Editorial Board, if necessary, carries out literary, scientific, and technical editing of the manuscript and coordinates with the Authors the interim (in Word format) and final (layout in PDF format) versions.

• After the decision to accept the article for publication, the manuscript is included in the publication schedule.
• Ethical aspects of interaction between the Editorial Board, the Editor-in-Chief, the Editorial Board, Reviewers, and Authors can be found in the Editorial Ethics and Policy section: https://tepsyj.ru/about/redaktsionnaya-etika/