Before a contribution made to the sections “Articles” or “Materials” is peer reviewed, it is assessed by the Editorial Team members who decide whether its content fits the periodical and check whether it has been prepared according to the provided guidelines for authors and followed the rules of ethics. Approved by the Editorial Team, the submission will be subject to double blind peer review, i.e. assessed by two independent reviewers, who are experts and active researchers in the fields dealt with by the author. The selected reviewers guarantee impartiality and they have no conflict of interests with the author whose paper they review (there is no professional dependence, they are not personally related to the author, and they have not collaborated with the author for the previous two years). The two reviewers do not know the identity of the author and vice versa. To guarantee anonymity the editors have the right to remove from the text to be reviewed all the information which could reveal the identity of the author. Each reviewer fills in a review form provided by the editors, however, if justified, they can also prepare a separate opinion about the text reviewed, including suggestions as to how the work should be corrected.

Peer reviews help the editors decide whether a manuscript should be accepted for publication, accepted for publication after the necessary corrections suggested by the reviewers have been introduced by the author or not accepted. Two negative peer reviews mean that a paper will not be accepted for publication. If two reviewers are of different opinions, the Editorial Team will make the final decision as to whether the manuscript should be accepted for publication. The editors may also consult the super-reviewer. The whole process takes no longer than eight weeks, i.e. the author will know whether their paper has been accepted for publication no later than eight weeks after they made their submission.

The list of reviewers is published every two years.