The rules of reviewing

Peer-Review and Editorial Publishing Procedure

All submitted manuscripts are peer-reviewed by the Editorial Board of the Journal, which includes a technical accordance to Notes for Authors of the manuscripts. The Editorial Board organises the peer-review process under the following rules of reviewing:

• Two independent reviewers from outside the unit are appointed for the evaluation of each manuscript,
• At least one of the reviewers is affiliated with the institution of a foreign nationality other than the author/authors of the manuscript,
• The author/authors and reviewers do not know their identities (so-called “double-blind review process”),
• Manuscripts are not passed by reviewers, who are in personal or professional relationships with the author/authors,
• The referee report is prepared in writing form with the conclusion containing the decision about the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript. In the case of two opposite reviews, the manuscript is given to a third independent reviewer,
• The names of reviewers of individual publications are not revealed; the list of reviewers is published at the end of each year on the website of the Journal.

Editorial Board Decision and Revision terms

The rules for acceptance or rejection of the manuscript are included in the Referee Report form presented on the website of the Journal:

• acceptable for publication without revisions,
• acceptable for publication with minor revisions,
• acceptable for publication with major revisions,
• more suitable for publication in another journal,
• not acceptable.

The final decision of qualification for publishing is made by the Editorial Board and Editor in Chief. All accepted papers are English-edited before publishing.