doi:10.3849/1802-7199

Review Process

Approved by the Editorial Board, valid from May 1st, 2012

The submitted texts are subjected to several stages of the assessment and adjustment process to ensure selection, preparation and publication of top quality contributions.

  • In the first stage, the Executive Editor checks the submitted contributions with the plagiarism search system. Further, he assesses them in terms of compliance with the professional text appearance, formal requirements contained in the Guidelines for Authors and Ethical Standards. If the received contribution is in substantial breach (e.g. exceeds the required length of the article, etc.), it may be excluded from further assessment process. In case of refusal, the author of the paper is informed by the Executive Editor.
  • In the second stage, the Editorial Board reviews the submitted original contributions made anonymous by the Executive Editor (members of the Editorial Board do not know the names of the authors), in particular in terms of their compliance with the journal´s profile, their nature (article / book review) and the composition of a specific issue. The Editorial Board also assesses the extent to which the received text addresses current professional issues, brings fundamental or new knowledge, fully satisfies the general requirements for professional text, respects the basic formal and ethical criteria, etc. Based on its decision it shall then recommend or not recommend them for the double-blind peer-review procedure. The author is informed about the Editorial Board's decision regarding acceptance or non-acceptance of the paper by the Executive Editor.
  • The double-blind peer-review process (the author does not know the reviewers and vice versa) is obligatory for articles and possibly for other contributions based on the decision of the Editorial Board. The review process is anonymous, carried out by at least two independent reviewers selected from the range of experts recommended by the Editorial Board, where none of the reviewers are members of the same department as the author or any of the co-authors, or are in any way in the conflict of interest regarding the peer-reviewed article. The result of the double-blind peer-review process is binding for the author of the contribution, who is required to implement the comments from reviewers by the deadline specified by the Secretary of the Editorial Board.
  • After the implementation of the comments and recommendations contained in the review opinions the text is again sent through the Secretary of the Editorial Board to the reviewers, who assess the extent to which the author reflected the comments in the revised text. In case of insufficient or late adjustment of the original contribution the publisher reserves the right to refuse publishing the original contribution.
  • Original contributions which have passed the double-blind peer-review process successfully are further edited and submitted for proofreading. If necessary, the Secretary of the Editorial Board may ask the author to cooperate on solving technical, linguistic or other problems that may occur during the preparation of the text for publishing.
  • The Secretary of the Editorial Board archives the reviews for at least five years.

Although the text undergoes continuous editorial review and proofreading, the author has responsibility for the accuracy of the content and correct use of language, compliance with the Guidelines for Authors and Ethical Standards. It is in the interest of the author to provide maximum assistance, communicate with the Executive Editor and the Secretary of the Editorial Board, and especially respect the deadlines, the exceeding of which may be a reason for the exclusion of the text from the prepared issue.

Created 18.5.2012 13:27:48 | read 10295x | Frank