Peer-Review Policy

  

The peer-review policy of the journal Algologia is committed to upholding the highest standards in evaluating the quality, originality, and reliability of research before publication. The journal supports the principles of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), evaluating submitted materials solely on the basis of their scientific content, methodological quality, and contribution to science. The journal recognizes various forms of scientific output, including theoretical and experimental studies, datasets, critical reviews, and review articles.

 

The evaluation procedure includes an initial editorial screening, a single-blind peer review process, author revisions, and final editorial decisions on the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts. Manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo an initial check for compliance with the journal’s aims and scope, as well as the manuscript preparation guidelines provided on the website. Manuscripts that meet these requirements are usually sent to independent experts (reviewers) to assess their scientific value. As a rule, external review lasts 3–4 weeks. Reviewers remain anonymous.

 

After receiving the reviewers’ feedback, the editor makes a decision on the manuscript: accept without revision; minor revision; major revision; reject. If the manuscript requires revision, it is returned to the author, and after the corrections are made, it is sent back to the reviewer. If the author has addressed all reviewer comments (or provided reasonable explanations regarding disputed points), and the reviewer agrees with the revised version of the manuscript, the scientific editor recommends it for publication. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final decision on the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts.