A reviewer is a specialist in the field covered by the publication. They are selected by the Subject Editor on the basis of their academic achievements. They have at least a PhD degree.
After receiving the article, devoid of personal data of the author/s of the publication, the reviewer assesses the possibility of preparing the review - both in terms of content and deadline. The editors propose a deadline not longer than 30 calendar days. The reviewer should meet the deadline, and if she/he anticipates a delay she/he should inform the Editorial office.

Reviewers are provided with a review form by the Editorial Secretary in order to produce a written opinion.

  • Review Form

  • The reviewers decide whether an article should be accepted for publication taking into account, among other things, its validity and originality, the use of appropriate methodology and the contribution of the publication to the state of research, as well as the literature list. The reviewer's duty is also to assess the degree of independence of the evaluated argument - pointing out scientific dishonesty, such as plagiarism. The reviewer evaluates the correctness of the use of specialized terminology and the overall level of understanding of the text.

    The review should contain an unambiguous conclusion concerning publishing the article. The reviewer should indicate on the review form whether she/he:
    - accepts the publication for publishing in its original version,
    - accepts the publication for publishing after making corrections and additions indicated by the reviewer without the necessity of a second review,
    - accepts the publication for publishing after making corrections and additions indicated by the reviewer with the necessity of a second review,
    - rejects the article.

    Reviewers are obliged to be confidential in their opinions about the reviewed article, and should not consult articles with other reviewers.