Basic steps:

  1. The author submits a manuscript.
  2. An editor is appointed to the manuscript.
  3. The editorial staff decides whether to submit the manuscript for review. If the decision is NO, the editor contacts the author about the decision.
  4. The editor appoints potential reviewers to the manuscript, of which the author is notified.
  5. Reviewers agree to review the manuscript.
  6. Reviewers submit their reports to the editor.
  7. The editorial staff discusses the reports and the editor makes the final decision.
  8. The editor contacts the author about the decision.
  9. If the decision is negative, the author is given the opportunity to transfer his manuscript to another journal.

Articles that, at the discretion of the editors, are on topics of potential interest to our readers, are sent for review to at least two independent reviewers proposed by the editors. When reviewers agree to evaluate a manuscript, the journal assumes that it is also a commitment to review subsequent corrections. Editors will not re-submit an article back to reviewers if it appears that the authors have not made a serious attempt to respond to the criticism.

The selection of reviewers is crucial to the publishing process and is based on many factors, including expertise, reputation, specific recommendations, and our own previous experience with the reviewer’s characteristics. Reviewers are generally expected to be prompt, careful, and objective, and to provide solid arguments for their opinion, whether critical or favorable.

Manuscripts could be returned to the authors without review if the editors consider that they are outside the scope of the journal or do not meet the criteria of scientific significance and innovation.

The final decision on the publication, revision or rejection of an article is taken by the editorial board on the basis of the reports and recommendations of the reviewers. The editors then make a decision based on the advice of the reviewers, among several options:

  • Accepted, with or without editorial edits.
  • Authors are asked to correct their manuscript before a final decision is made.
  • Rejected, usually due to lack of innovation, insufficient scientific significance or major technical and / or interpretive problems. However, it can be pointed out to the authors that further work on the relevant manuscript may justify its re-submission.

The review process usually takes between 2 and 3 months, except in case of discrepancies between the reviewers’ reports.

Reviewer’s responsibilities:

  • Evaluates manuscripts critically but constructively.
  • Prepares detailed comments on the research and article to help authors improve their work.
  • Recommends to the editor whether the work is suitable for the journal.
  • Declares real or suspected conflicts of interest – personal and professional – anything that would prevent the reviewer from providing an objective analysis of the work.
  • Treats the manuscript as confidential (e.g., reviewers cannot contact / consult other people about the manuscript).
  • Avoids making derogatory comments to authors.
  • Refrains from using the manuscript, which he or she reviews in any way in his or her own work.
  • Avoids communicating directly with authors.