Principles of Peer Review

The peer review process is carried out in accordance with the rules presented in the publication Good Practices in Reviewing Procedures in Science (Dobre praktyki w procedurach recenzyjnych w nauce) published in Warsaw in 2011. 

• By submitting their text, the authors consent to the review process.
• Articles are formally assessed by the Editorial Board within 30 days of being received. Approved texts are sent for review. They are always assessed by two external reviewers from the research field consistent with the subject of the study, who are not members of the Journal’s Editorial Staff.
• The reviewers are selected by the Journal’s Editorial Board.
• Reviews are in writing. The review template is available on the Journal’s website.
• Articles are not sent to reviewers from the author’s affiliate institution.
• The Journal uses double-blind review: reviewer doesn’t know the identity of the author, and vice-versa.
• An article is assigned a code that identifies it at a later stage in the peer-review process. The author is always informed about the results of the review.
• The review containing critical comments and suggestions is sent by the Editor-in-Chief to the author who is obliged to make the required corrections.
• The author has 30 days to make corrections and submit the final text to the Editors.
• After corrections, if their scope was significant, the article may be returned to the reviewer for approval.
• The final decision to publish an article is made by the Editor-in-Chief. An article to be published has to receive two positive reviews.
• A polemic between the author and the reviewer is allowed (in the case of critical comments of the reviewer regarding substantive issues).
• Where the author does not accept reviewers’ ratings, the article might be withdrawn on its author’s request.

The list of reviewers cooperating with the editorial office is published on the Journal’s website.