Peer review process
A detailed description of the peer review process

  1. Type of review process: The journal uses double-blind peer review: i.e. authors and reviewers do not know each other’s identity throughout the review process. There are at least two reviewers for one article.

  2. Manuscript submission: The correspondence author submits the research paper to the journal via on-line editorial system, while all manuscripts which are not research papers are sent to the executive editor via e-mail.

  3. First evaluation by executive editor: The manuscript that failed to meet the basic requirements of linguistic correctness or is inconsistent with the editorial requirements or does not fit into the thematic profile of the journal is rejected without review.

  4. Invitation to reviewers: After initial verification, the executive editor and subject editors select reviewers, who prepare, within an agreed time, reviews by filling in forms provided via on-line editorial system.

  5. Reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest, availability and the principle of confidentiality (they do not use the information obtained during the review before the paper’s publication).
    They assess the manuscript given its substantive content, correctness of the used methods, logic of reasoning, coherence of contents with the topic, relevant selection of references, etc.
    The review is submitted to the journal with recommendations to:
    - accept without any changes,
    - accept upon minor changes suggested by the reviewers,
    - accept upon major changes and re-review,
    - reject.

  6. Executive editor sends comments of the reviewers to the author of the manuscript. If the reviewer makes the publication of the manuscript dependent on his/her corrections, the author has to do so in line with the comments formulated by the reviewer. The author can also respond to the reviewer’s remarks by presenting own justified opinion to the Editorial Team and reviewers.

  7. Decision: The decision on manuscript’s publication is taken by the executive editor and subject editors after prior consultation with the Advisory Board.
    Names of the reviewers for respective issues are not made public. The Editorial Team placed the list of all reviewers cooperating with the journal on the website.

  8. Further steps: If accepted, the manuscript is submitted for publication. If it is rejected, the executive editor sends back to the author all comments from reviewers and the Advisory Board to help improve the manuscript. It could be sent by the author again as a new version. In order to guarantee the highest quality of publications, the Editorial Team uses the Crossref Similarity Check tool.