The review procedure complies with the recommendations of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education published in the brochure Good Practices in Review Procedures in Science. [Dobre praktyki w procedurach recenzyjnych w nauce]
All submissions are initially assessed by the Editorial Board to determine their suitability and compliance with the journal’s scope and standards. Manuscripts that pass this stage are then subjected to a double-blind peer-review process conducted by at least two independent external reviewers and supervised by the Editorial Board in consultation with the Advisory Board. The review must be in written form and must end with a clear conclusion regarding whether the article should be accepted for publication or rejected. The names of the reviewers of individual publications/issues are not disclosed.
The review process normally takes no longer than three months, after which authors are notified of one of the following editorial decisions:
- acceptance of the paper,
- acceptance of the paper subject to minor revisions recommended by the reviewers,
- acceptance of the paper subject to major revisions recommended by the reviewers, or
- rejection of the submission.
Where major revisions are recommended, authors are requested to revise the manuscript accordingly or to provide a reasoned explanation, either in a separate letter to the Editor-in-Chief or within the revised manuscript, detailing why specific recommendations have not been adopted. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on whether the submission may be accepted without the recommended revisions.
The content of the reviewers’ reports is made available to the authors.
Under normal circumstances, and subject to reviewer availability, the overall turnaround time from submission to final decision should not exceed three to four months.