Review procedure

The editorial team reserves the right to review and modify submitted materials. Texts are qualified for print by the editorial team in cooperation with the thematic editor and members of the Scientific Council as well as upon seeking the opinion of two reviewers. At least 2 reviewers are asked to assess each publication (double-blind review). Reviews should be in writing and end with an unambiguous conclusion concerning acceptance for publication. Names of reviews are given on the reverse of the journal’s title page.

At the same time, following the recommendations of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, we remind that “ghostwriting” and “guest authorship” are forms of scientific dishonesty, and all disclosed instances of such practices will be exposed, including notification of any relevant entities (institutions employing authors, scientific associations, associations of academic editors etc.). “Ghostwriting” refers to a situation when a person made a substantial contribution to the publication without revealing his or her participation. “Guest authorship” (“honorary authorship”) refers to a situation when the participation of the author is negligible or none, and despite this person is listed as the author/co-author of the publication. (source: https://pbn.nauka.gov.pl/).

***

Regarding the criteria and procedures for evaluation of scientific journals in accordance with the standards of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Poland as well as index bases (e.g. Web of Science, Scopus, etc.), following procedures are used for reviewing:

– there are two independent reviewers outside of the research unit affiliated by the author of the text to assess the article;

– the reviewers are chosen by the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board due to their respective, actual field of research;

– reviewer signs a declaration of no conflict of interest (the conflict of interest occurs when the reviewer and the author are involved in personal relationship – kinship to the second degree, legal relationships, marriage, relationship of professional subordination or direct scientific cooperation in the past two years preceding the year of preparation the review);

– review shall be in written form containing a clear request for admission or rejection of the publication of the reviewed article;

– peer review process is understood as interaction and advice on the respective text, and text only, between an author and an expert in the field of publication;

– the reviewers contact only the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board, they are forbidden to disclose any data on the review, and the editors mediate in interaction between the editor and the author of the paper (double blind peer review, PrePrints type);

– names of the reviewers of each article published in the journal are not disclosed until the end of the review procedure and the publication of the respective volume;

– the reviews are not published, and are stored permanently in the archive of the journal.