Guide for reviewers

The papers are reviewed by at least two independent Reviewers in line with the principles of double-blind review process, i.e. Authors and Reviewers do not know each other’s identity.

The review includes a clear conclusion of the Reviewer concerning conditions of eligibility of the paper for publication or its rejection:

• approve,
• approve without change,
• approve upon changes suggested by the Reviewer,
• approve upon major changes and re-review,
• reject.

The Reviewers review the papers observing the principle of confidentiality and they do not use the information obtained during the review before the paper’s publication.

Comments of the Reviewers are sent to the paper’s Author. If the Reviewer makes the publication of the paper dependent on corrections suggested by the Reviewer, the Author has to do so in line with the comments formulated by the Reviewer The Author can respond to the Reviewer’s suggestions by presenting his/her justified opinion to the Editorial Team. If both reviews are positive, the papers are published.
The decision on publication of a paper is made by the Subject/Executive Editors after prior consultation with the Editorial Committee. Names of the Reviewers for respective issues are not made public.

The Editorial Team makes public the list of cooperating Reviewers on the website of the Journal.

The Review is made based on a review form (Review Form).

Review procedure

1. At least two independent reviewers from outside the unit are appointed to evaluate each publication.
2. The review is based on the so-called double-blind review process, where the author (s) and reviewers do not know their identities.
3. The review is prepared in a written form and ends with an explicit application allowing the article to be published or rejected.
4. The rules for qualifying or rejecting the publication and the review form are publicly available on the journal's website.
5. The names of the reviewers of individual publications are not disclosed. The journal publishes a list of cooperating reviewers.