Each submitted text is subject to a preliminary formal assessment by the Editorial Office (the Editor-in-Chief and the relevant Subject Editor) in terms of compliance with the journal’s profile.
The decision to select reviewers is made by the Editor-in-Chief. The reviews takes place in the double-blinded peer review system.
If the Editor-in-Chief is the author of the text, all decisions related to the publication of the manuscript are made jointly by the other members of the Editorial Office.
If a member of the Editorial Office is the author of the text, all decisions related to the publication of the manuscript are made by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal.
The initially approved texts are forwarded to two independent Reviewers from outside the Author(s)’ university.
Reviewers sign a declaration of a lack of conflict of interest, i.e.:
they are not affiliated with the same institution as the Author(s);
they are not in a relationship of subordination with the Author(s);
they have not been in direct scientific cooperation with the Author(s)in the last two years preceding the preparation of reviews;
they are not in direct personal relations with the Author(s) (kinship, legal partnership, conflict).
In the case of texts written in English, at least one of the Reviewers is affiliated with a foreign institution.
The Editorial Office provides a potential reviewer with a description of the manuscript (title, number of pages, abstract of the text) and the deadline for the review, leaving him/her freedom to decide whether to accept or reject the manuscript for review.
Reviewers are asked to prepare a detailed, content-related written review of the manuscript in terms of: originality of contribution to science, matching the title to the content, internal coherence and structure of the text, quality of the reference list, linguistic level of the text, methodological accuracy and other aspect important in view of the journal’s profile.
The Editorial Office imposes the structure of the review. It is dictated by the review form.
Based on the comments made, the Reviewer qualifies the reviewed manuscripts as:
accepted for publication;
accepted for publication, provided that the suggested corrections and amendments are made;
accepted for publication, subject to substantial reconstruction of the text and another positive review;
not accepted for publication.
The Reviewer submits the review to the Editorial Office of Transport Geography Papers of the Polish Geographical Societyin an electronic form.
The Reviewer’s comments are forwarded to the Author(s) to amend the manuscript in accordance with the Reviewer’s recommendations. The Reviewer is entitled to re-assess the corrected manuscript.
If the Author(s) of the manuscript do not agree with the Reviewer’s opinion, they have the right to take a stance on it and send their reply to the Editorial Office.
The final decision on the publication of a given article is made by the Editor-in-Chief, after reading the reviews, and with the participation of members of the Editorial team.
The names of the Reviewers for particular issues are not disclosed. Once a year, the Editors publish the current list of Reviewers with whom they cooperate on the journal’s website.
The rules of approving or rejecting publications and the review form are publicly available on the journal’s website.
Articles rejected by the Reviewers remain archived in the Editorial Office for 5 years.
Texts of a non-scientific nature do not require a review and are approved for publication by the Editor-in-Chief.
