All texts published in the journal are reviewed. The journal uses the double-blind method, which means that the author and reviewers do not know their identity (before the review, information identifying the authors is removed from the paper). Reviewers are appointed by the editor.
The review form is available here.
Guidelines for reviewers:
- Reviewers are asked to respond to the request for review within the deadline indicated in the query (usually 7 days), regardless of whether they undertake to review the text or not.
- Reviewers are asked to perform a review within the deadline indicated in the query (usually 1 month).
- Reviewers are asked to confirm the absence of conflict of interest before starting a review.
- The review should be performed on the provided form. There is a possibility of attaching a file with comments to the work.
- Reviewer can request an extension of the deadline for the review.
- Reviewers should be guided by the rules described in the ethical principles.
- At each stage of the work, as well as after the review, the reviewer is obliged to immediately notify the editorial office of any suspected improper conduct, unethical behaviour or plagiarism (autoplagiarism).
- Eligibility and rejection criteria for articles:
- compliance of the title and abstracts with the subject matter of the article;
- compliance of conclusions with the presented results in the article;
- correctness and novelty of the applied research methods;
- correctness of the work layout, language, style, units and terminology;
- adequacy of attached drawings and tables;
- correctness of quotations and timeliness of the presented state of knowledge.
- The review must end with a clear conclusion concerning the article.
- In a situation where the article receives one positive and one negative review, the editorial office sends the article to the third review or makes the independent decision whether to accept or reject the text.