REVIEWING PROCESS
- Submission of a manuscript to the Editorial Team constitutes the Authors’ consent to the review procedure applied by the journal.
- Manuscripts submitted to the Editorial Team undergo an initial formal assessment to ensure compliance with the guidelines for authors and the journal’s academic profile. At this stage, manuscript that do not meet editorial requirements may be rejected without being referred for further processing.
- All manuscripts meeting the formal requirements are checked using the iThenticate anti-plagiarism system.
- In the next stage, manuscripts undergo an initial substantive assessment carried out by the subject editor. On this basis, a decision is made to refer the text for external review or to reject it.
- The journal employs a double-blind peer review procedure, in which the identities of authors and reviewers remain unknown to one another.
- Each manuscript is sent for evaluation by two independent reviewers with a track record of research in the relevant field.
- Reviews are prepared in the form of written reports in accordance with the journal’s standard evaluation form.
- Reviewers must not be affiliated with the same organisational unit as the author nor have a relationship with the author that could lead to a conflict of interest. A conflict of interest is understood to mean, in particular, personal, professional, or academic relationships that could influence the objectivity of the assessment.
- Reviewers assess the article, taking into account in particular:
- the consistency of the manuscript’s content with its title and scope,
- the correct formulation of the research problem and handling it,
- the substantive accuracy (including the research methods used, terminology, and the selection and use of sources),
- the quality and appropriateness of illustrative material (tables, graphs, diagrams),
- linguistic accuracy and clarity of argumentation,
- the quality and significance of the research results presented.
- Reviewers have the opportunity to provide a detailed descriptive opinion.
- The review concludes with a clear recommendation to the Editorial Team:
- acceptance of the article for publication in its current form,
- acceptance of the article following the corrections suggested by the reviewer,
- acceptance of the article following revisions and a re-review,
- rejection of the article.
- In the event of significant discrepancies in the reviewers’ recommendations, the manuscript may be referred for an additional, third review. The final decision on whether to accept or reject the manuscript is made by the Editorial Team.
- Publication of the article is conditional upon receiving at least two positive reviews.
Review form template available below:
