Responsibilities of the Referees / Guiding principles

• Independence and application of the double-blind peer review procedure

Each scientific article submitted for publication is reviewed by two independent external Referees. The procedure of double-blind peer review is the guarantee that neither the contributor nor the appointed Referees can learn each other’s identity. If a Referee cannot prepare a review, they are obliged to instantly inform the Editorial Board of the fact.

• Meeting deadlines and the form of a review

The appointed Referee should prepare a review within the time limits defined in “Principles of reviewing” available on the Journal’s webpage. The review should be rendered in the appropriate form. The commissioning of the service will be communicated to the selected Referee by the Editorial Board. The review form is available on the webpage. If the Referee is not capable of preparing a review within the defined time limit, they are obliged to notify the Editorial Board as soon as possible. In such a case another Referee is appointed.

• Objectivism and evaluation of the reliability of the material submitted for publication

The reviews are aimed at evaluating the reliability of the submitted work and its scientific quality. They should be prepared in an objective manner, in accordance with the principles of editorial ethics, on the basis of scientific arguments and in compliance with the best of the contributors’ knowledge and their best will. Criticism made for personal reasons is inappropriate. All commentaries, suggestions and evaluations must be expressed in the way that leaves no doubts and is supported with arguments of the substantive nature. The following are considered to be the basic guiding criteria and must be borne in mind while preparing the review: originality of the study, its scientific character, conformity with the profile of the Journal, the skill of formulating theses and proving them right or wrong, maturity of leading a scientific discussion, the skill of formulating conclusions and opinions, as well as proper making use of the available literature of the subject. The specific principles of the reviewing procedure, which were accepted by the Journal, are available on the Journal’s webpage.

• Verification of the originality of the material submitted for publication

The Referee informs the Editorial Board of each case of violation of the ethical principles binding in the Journal, in particular of their suspicion of any form of plagiarism being used, indicating the reasons and the scope (including fragments of the text) which raise their objections. In the case where the Referee is familiar with the content contained in the text of the work used by the author of the work submitted for publication, they should notify the Editorial Board of the fact and justify their suspicions by presenting relevant evidence.

• Confidentiality

All the works submitted for reviewing are treated as confidential material. Showing them to other people, discussing them, expressing views included in them as the Referee’s own ones, a Referee’s availing themselves of the content included in the work being reviewed prior to its publication shall be treated as highly unethical. The Reviewer, on the other hand, is allowed to discuss the question of abiding by the editorial standards with the Editorial Board in order to make assessment of the fact whether the principle of scientific reliability has been adhered to effectively.