Double blind
- In order to assess each paper minimum two independent reviewers are appointed. Both of them are affiliated to institutions different from the author’s institution. The Advisory Board reserves the right to decide not to send a paper for review if in their judgement the paper does not meet academic standards.
- The authors and reviewers are not informed about each other’s identity (a double blind review process)
- The review must take a written form and end with an unequivocal recommendation to accept or reject the paper for publication.
- Names of reviewers of particular publications are not revealed; once a year the periodical publishes a list of the collaborating reviewers.
- Having received a positive review the paper is presented for approval at the meeting of the Advisory Board. The author is informed about the Board’s decision via email. In exceptional cases the Board reserves the right to decide against the publication of a paper which has received one negative review. The decisions of the Board are irrevocable.
- After the acceptance of the paper for publication the author receives a agreement to sign which confirms his/her own authorship and the non-infringement of rights of other persons. The Advisory Board declares that all the possible cases of unethical behaviour will be disclosed.
The role of the Advisory Board
Once the paper has received positive reviews, it is presented for acceptance to the members of the Advisory Board. In exceptional cases the Board reserves the right to decide against the publication of a paper which has received one negative review. The Author is informed about the Board's decision via email. The decisions of the Board are irrevocable.
