Scientific articles submitted to the editorial office of the journal undergo mandatory peer review to ensure high scientific quality and alignment with the journal’s scope.
Type of peer review. Peer review is conducted confidentially following the double-blind principle (neither the author nor the reviewer knows each other’s identity). The journal applies both internal and external peer review. Internal review is carried out by members of the editorial board. If necessary, articles are sent for external review to leading experts in the relevant field.
Criteria for reviewer selection. Reviewers are scientists holding a doctoral degree or PhD and with a scientific specialization closely related to the topic of the submitted article. Reviewers are selected by the editorial board based on their professional competence and experience in the relevant field.
Conflict of interest. Reviewers are required to inform the editorial office of any potential conflicts of interest and to decline reviewing if such a conflict may affect the objectivity of their evaluation.
Review timeline. The editorial board notifies authors of the receipt of the manuscript within 5 days of registration. Review timelines are determined individually but generally do not exceed one month. If necessary, the article may be sent for additional or repeated review, including the involvement of a third independent reviewer in cases of significant discrepancies in the evaluations.
Plagiarism check. All manuscripts undergo mandatory plagiarism checking using the software StrikePlagiarism.com provided by the Polish company Plagiat.pl.
Documentation. Reviews are prepared according to established requirements and are stored in the editorial office. Correspondence with authors is conducted exclusively via email.
Decision making. A positive review does not guarantee publication. The final decision on acceptance or rejection of a manuscript is made by the editorial board. In the event of rejection, the author receives a reasoned notification. Articles not recommended for publication by the reviewer may be resubmitted after substantial revision.
Right to appeal. Authors have the right to appeal an editorial decision by providing well-founded explanations or additional materials.