PEER REVIEW PROCESS

  1. An article submitted for publication is subjected to an initial screening process during which the editors of the journal establish whether the author has followed the guidelines concerning its layout and the scientific profile of the journal. At this stage, the text of the article is also screened for plagiarism using the iThenticate plagiarism checker.
  2. Information which would reveal the identity of the author is deleted from a paper accepted by the editors, which is then forwarded to at least two reviewers from the list published on the journal’s website. The reviewers will not be connected with the scientific institution the author is affiliated to.
  3. Then, the review is forwarded to the author. The author has a chance to express their opinion on the review as well as to introduce corrections and clarifications. The review should reach the author no later than three months after the submission date.
  4. The identities of both the reviewers and the authors are withheld from one another throughout the reviewing process (double-blind reviewing process).
  5. An article is accepted for publication if both reviews clearly state such a recommendation. The review report should result in one of the following decisions:
    a. Accepted for publication
    b. Accepted after minor revisions
    c. Accepted after major revisions
    d. Rejected
  6. The review template and the criteria for acceptance and rejection are available on the journal’s website.
  7. If the two reviews give contradictory recommendations, the paper is subjected to a third, final, review.
  8. A negative recommendation has to be justified in the review.
  9. If a submission is rejected due to its incompatibility with the scientific profile of the journal, or if the reviews are clearly negative, the author is denied the right to appeal against this decision.


Review template