Peer Review Policy

The Journal of Secure Digital Technologies applies a double-blind peer review process in accordance with the principles and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Under this model, neither the authors nor the reviewers are informed of each other's identities throughout the review process.

Manuscript Review Process

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts through the Journal's Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform.

The manuscript must comply with the Journal's formatting requirements and include metadata in Kazakh, Russian, and English.

2. Initial Editorial Screening (up to 5 working days)

The Executive Secretary conducts a preliminary assessment to verify:

• compliance with the Journal's scope;
• conformity with the Journal's formatting and technical requirements;
• completeness of all mandatory manuscript sections (including Abstract, Keywords, References, etc.);
• plagiarism screening results (minimum originality threshold: 70%).

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements are returned to the authors for revision before entering peer review.

3. Appointment of Reviewers

The Editor-in-Chief appoints two independent reviewers with recognized expertise in the manuscript's subject area.

Reviewers are selected from qualified researchers and specialists who have publications indexed in Web of Science or Scopus. The Journal actively involves international reviewers in the peer review process whenever appropriate.

4. Peer Review (approximately 2 weeks)

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript according to the following criteria:

• scientific novelty and originality;
• methodological rigor;
• validity of the conclusions;
• quality and clarity of presentation;
• accuracy and relevance of references;
• theoretical and/or practical significance.

A reviewer may recommend one of the following decisions:

• Accept — the manuscript is suitable for publication without revision.
• Accept with Minor Revisions — publication is recommended after minor corrections.
• Major Revisions Required — substantial revisions are required, followed by a new round of peer review.
• Reject — the manuscript does not meet the Journal's scientific or editorial standards.

5. Editorial Decision (up to 1 week)

Based on the reviewers' reports, the Editorial Board makes the final decision regarding publication.

The corresponding author receives the editorial decision together with the anonymous reviewers' comments.

6. Revision (if required)

Authors submit the revised manuscript through the OJS platform.

Where appropriate, the revised manuscript may be returned to the reviewers for an additional round of peer review.

7. Publication

Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, proofreading, and typesetting before publication in the earliest available issue of the Journal.

Each published article is assigned a Digital Object Identifier (DOI).

Review Timeline

Confidentiality

All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents throughout the editorial and peer review process.

Reviewers must not use unpublished materials or research findings for personal benefit and must not disclose manuscript contents to third parties without prior authorization from the Editor-in-Chief.