Peer Review Process

  1. Each of the proposed articles is preliminarily evaluated by selected members of the editorial board or editors who are specialists in a given field (preselection stage). The text can be accepted, rejected or sent back in order to correct some topic-related or formal aspects.
  2. The academic editor, together with the editorial team, designate two independent reviewers, who are given the texts without the personal data of the author (in accordance with the double-blind review procedure).

  3. The reviewer receives a review form and evaluates the article’s substantive and formal-editorial quality on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 represents the lowest score and 5 the highest score, taking into account:

    • the value and relevance of the subject matter addressed, with particular attention to its consistency with the journal’s scope and, in the case of thematic issues, with the proposed theme of the issue;
    • the theoretical grounding of the study and its engagement with the current state of research;
    • methodological rigour and correctness;
    • the practical applicability of the findings, as well as the clarity and comprehensibility of the text;
    • linguistic and stylistic correctness;
    • the selection and use of relevant literature.

    Based on the above criteria, the reviewer provides a justified recommendation and indicates whether the article:

    • can be accepted for publication without revisions;
    • can be accepted for publication subject to minor or major revisions;
    • requires substantial revision and a new round of peer review;
    • is not suitable for publication.
  1. The content of the review shall not be revealed to 3rd parties, in compliance with the ethical guidelines.
  2. After receiving the review, the editor in chief makes the final decision concerning the publishing of the piece.
  3. The authors are informed about the final decision by the editorial assistant.
  4. An alphabetical list of the reviewers is available on the journal's website and is published in the previous issue of the journal. 

Criteria for rejecting articles:

1. The text may be rejected at the pre-selection stage due to a lack of connection with the thematic scope of the journal and due to formal deficiencies.
2. The text may be rejected at the editorial stage due to negative reviews or the lack of a positive assessment by the anti-platform system.