|   PL  .  EN   |       

About the journal » Review procedure


By submitting a paper, the authors consent to the review process. The reviewing procedures are in line with the guidelines of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education and COPE. All submitted papers are first evaluated by the Editorial Board, and then by two independent reviewers (not from the research unit affiliated by the author of the article). The principle of double-blind review applies. The author is informed about the result of the review. Reviews are not published. The final decision regarding the acceptance of the article for publication is made by the Editor-in-chief (and the subject editor).

Dear Reviewers,
The editors of the magazine, wishing to improve the publishing work, requests all of you to read the following explanations and guidelines:
1. The double-blind review process is applied in the review process.
2. The names of the Reviewers are not disclosed to individual authors or third parties, but they are posted on the periodical’s website in a collective list of reviewers cooperating with the journal in a given year (link). Reviewers, undertaking the task of preparing an opinion, consent to the publication of their name and affiliation on the website of the periodical..
3. The review is in writing and contains a request to accept or reject the article. The review form is provided in the attachment (below).
4. Each of the Reviewers, by agreeing to prepare a review, undertakes to comply with the following rules:
– confidentiality (the texts of articles and their reviews are confidential, and their disclosure to unauthorized persons / not participating in the publishing process is unacceptable)
– objectivity (substantive evaluation of the text; personal criticism of the authors is unacceptable; all comments should be properly argued)
– counteracting conflicts of interest (using the peer-reviewed papers for your own purposes and for your own benefit is unacceptable; if the reviewer discovers the possibility of a conflict of interest, s/he is obliged to inform the editors about it)
– reliability (in the event of any significant similarities between the reviewed article and other papers, the reviewer should inform the editors about it; it is also advisable – if necessary – to mention relevant important papers not quoted by the author and related to the subject of the article)
– punctuality (obligation to provide a review within a predetermined period or inform the editorial office of any changes in this respect or the impossibility of fulfilling the entrusted task).

Criteria for accepting articles for publication:
– compliance with the thematic scope of the journal and with ethical principles applicable in science
– opinion of reviewers
– scientific value of an article
– uniqueness of the approach to a problem, clarity, and logic of the argument
– research workshop of authors.

dwonload file REVIEW FORM.DOC