Peer Review Process

 

Procedure concerning the external review of texts-to-be-published

 
In accordance with recommendations endorsed by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education a  reviewing procedure is applied to all text-to-be-published in sections encompassing papers and dissertations, sources and materials as well as in-depth reviewing papers. Reviews are conducted by experts specializing in the subject of a given text. The review of each text is based on a special form (attachment 5), and the procedure is confidential and mutually anonymous.
 
Phases of reviewing procedure

The review process is conducted in accordance with COPE standards and the journal’s publication ethics policy. Reviewers are required to familiarize themselves with the journal’s review ethics policy and the standards for the use of GenAI tools, and to confirm this in a special declaration (Attachment 7).

1. STAGE ONE: Preliminary Qualification
The preliminary qualification of the text takes up to two weeks. At this stage, the editorial board decides whether the submitted text falls within the scope of the journal and meets its substantive requirements. If the verification is positive, the text proceeds to the next stage — peer review.

A text will be rejected if:

  • it has been previously published or made available online;

  • it infringes copyright;

  • it contains unacknowledged borrowings from other works;

  • it is a summary or compilation of earlier texts by the same or other authors;

  • it lacks a scholarly character or does not correspond to the thematic scope of the journal.

2. STAGE TWO: Review
After the preliminary qualification, the text is sent to two reviewers whose fields of expertise cover the subject matter addressed in the manuscript. A member of the editorial team cannot serve as a reviewer. Each review is prepared on the basis of a special review form (Attachment 5), and the process is conducted with full confidentiality and double anonymity (both author and reviewer remain anonymous). The review process takes up to two months.

3. STAGE THREE: Editorial Decision Based on Reviews
After receiving the reviews, the editorial board analyses the reviewers’ comments.

  • A text is rejected if it receives two negative reviews.

  • If the two reviews are inconsistent or inconclusive, the editorial board appoints a third reviewer, whose opinion is decisive.

4. STAGE FOUR: Author Revisions and Final Decision
The editorial board sends the content of the reviews to the author, requesting that they revise the text or respond to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. At this stage, the author may withdraw their manuscript, or the editorial board may decide not to proceed with publication if the author refuses, without justification, to accept the reviewers’ and editors’ comments.

The editorial board reserves the right to make substantive corrections to the text, in consultation with the author, at any stage of the publication process (starting from the first stage).
 
Files to download: