Instructions to reviewers

Reviewers are obliged to evaluate the paper objectively and professionally. They are required to provide the editors with the assessment of scientific value within a certain period of time.

The reviewers evaluate the papers depending on the paper topic and journal topic compatibility, the relevance of the areas studied and the methods applied, the originality and scientific relevance of the information presented in the paper, as well as the style of a scientific presentation.

In case of reasonable doubts about the breach of professional ethics, the reviewer is required to notify the editors. Also, if they learn that the paper was published in more journals at the same time, they have to inform the editors.

The reviewer must not be in a conflict of interest with the authors or organization that finances the realization of paper. If there is a conflict of interest, the reviewers are required to immediately inform the editors.

The review must be clear and objective, including supporting arguments. The papers sent to the reviewers are considered confidential. They have to keep all the information and ideas as confidential and it is strictly prohibited to use them for their own publications and their personal gain.

 

The review procedure:

The review is anonymous. Each paper is evaluated by two reviewers selected by the Editorial Board. The reviewers must have relevant knowledge from the field that covers the written paper and they must not belong to the same institution as the author of the paper. If the two reviews are not consistent, it is required to make a third review. According to its results, the paper is further corrected or accepted. If there are two negative reviews, the paper is rejected. The reviews are free and they have to be finished within three weeks.

The reviewers evaluate the paper independently, they do not know the identity of each other. If the decisions of two reviewers do not equal, the author can ask for the other reviewers` opinions.

The reviewers are obliged to inform the Editorial Board that the submitted paper can be accepted for publication without correction, that it can be accepted for publication after correction according to the given suggestions and instructions (with or without re-reading by the reviewers) or that it cannot be accepted for publication.