Publishing procedure

Having received the text and verifying it in terms of authorship and compliance with the publishing profile and meeting the formal requirements, the Editorial Board decides to start the reviewing process of the proposed publication based on the preliminary text evaluation.

The editor selects at least two independent Reviewers from among recognized authorities in a given field, and the selected Reviewer must guarantee:

• independence of opinion,
  
• no conflict of interest, expressed in particular by the lack of personal or business relations with the Author of the article,
  
• confidentiality regarding the substantive content of the materials and opinions about them.

After selecting the Reviewers, the editorial office forwards the article to them without disclosing the name of the Author/s and the research unit, in which he/she works, provides the review form applicable in the editorial office and specifies the date of its preparation.

Peer-reviewed papers are confidential and anonymous. Reviewers are not allowed to use the knowledge about the work before its publication.

The Reviewer does not receive a fee for the review of the article.

The personal data of the Reviewers is confidential and may be declassified only at the request of the Author and with the consent of the Reviewer in the case of
a negative review or an article containing debatable elements, or in the event of a violation of the law or good academic manners.

The list of Reviewers is published once a year on the Journal's website.

The final decision on publication is made based on the reviews received, the Author's responses to the Reviewers' comments and their analysis, taking into account also the usefulness of the publication for readers, especially scientists, researchers and practitioners representing fields related to the profile of the Publishing House.

At each stage of the review, the corrected article should be returned within the time limit specified by the editors. Otherwise, the article is withdrawn.

The author does not have to agree with the Reviewers' suggestions, which he should explain in a relevant statement, stating the reasons for disregarding comments.

In the case of a review disqualifying the article, the editor decides to reject the article or - if necessary - directs the article to another Reviewer.

Having accepted the text for publication, the publishing house is obliged to ensure a professional editing process, to subject the edited text to authorization, and then to present the final version to the Author for author's proofreading.

The publishing house provides Authors and collaborators with confidentiality of information and security of data processing.

In the event of a decision to withdraw from the publication, the Publishing House will not use, in whole or in part,
the publications provided by the Authors for evaluation and review.