Review Process

Approved by the Editorial Board and effective from March 31, 2023.

Submitted texts undergo a multi-stage evaluation and editing process aimed at selecting, preparing, and publishing the highest quality contributions. 

First, the executive editor checks the received contributions using plagiarism detection tools and assesses adherence to the characteristics of a scholarly text, formal requirements stated in the Guidelines for Authors, and the journal's Ethical Standards. If a submitted contribution significantly violates these criteria (e.g., exceeds the required article length, etc.), it may be excluded from further evaluation. In case of rejection, the author is informed by the executive editor. 

Subsequently, the Editorial Board evaluates the submitted author contributions, which have been anonymised by the executive editor (the board members are unaware of the authors' names). They assess the alignment of the texts with the journal's profile and the composition of the specific issue. Additionally, the Editorial Board evaluates the extent to which the submitted text addresses current scholarly issues, brings significant or entirely new insights, meets general requirements for academic texts, and respects essential formal and ethical criteria, among others. Based on their decision, the board recommends or does not recommend the contribution for anonymous peer review. Articles are sent for peer review immediately after the Editorial Board's vote. The reviewers' suggestions are also included in the evaluation of the suitability of the texts. A member of the Editorial Board may request a joint vote and collective discussion of a specific article and the proposed reviewers during a planned meeting. The author is informed of the Editorial Board's decision regarding the executive editor's acceptance or rejection of the contribution. 

As the Editorial Board decides, all articles are mandatorily subjected to anonymous peer review (the author is unaware of the reviewers' names, and vice versa). In an anonymous peer review, the contribution is assessed by at least two independent reviewers selected from the pool of experts recommended by the Editorial Board. Neither of the reviewers can be affiliated with the same institution as the (co)author or have any conflicts of interest regarding the reviewed text. The outcome of the anonymous peer review is binding for the author, who must incorporate the reviewers' comments within the timeframe specified by the secretary of the Editorial Board or the executive editor. 

After incorporating the comments provided in the review reports, the executive editor evaluates the quality of the implemented changes and, with the approval of the editor-in-chief, decides whether to:

  • Send the text back for review by the reviewer(s).
  • Return the text to the author with their recommendations for further changes.
  • Invite another reviewer to provide a third review report.
  • Accept the text and prepare it for publication.
  • Recommend significant revision and submission for a new round of peer review.
  • Reject the text. 

In case of inadequate or delayed revisions of the author's contribution, the publisher reserves the right to reject the article’s publication. 

The editorial team further edits author contributions that successfully pass the anonymous peer review, including language proofreading. If necessary, the secretary of the Editorial Board or the executive editor may request the author's cooperation in resolving technical, linguistic, or other issues that may arise while preparing the text for publication. The editorial office archives the review reports for a minimum of five years. 

Although the text undergoes ongoing editorial control and language proofreading, the responsibility for the content and linguistic accuracy of the text, adherence to the Guidelines for Authors, and the journal's Ethical Standards lie with the author. It is in the author's interest to provide maximum cooperation, particularly with the executive editor and the secretary of the Editorial Board, and, above all, to adhere to the specified deadlines. Failure to meet the deadlines may lead to excluding the text from the planned issue.

Crossref Similarity Check logo

Created 18.5.2012 13:27:48 | read 13888x | Frank