After consulting the journal’s Advisory Board, the Editorial Board and the volume editor(s) make a first selection among the received proposals (abstracts). The decisions are based on the topic’s compatibility with the theme of the volume and on its scientific quality.

The Authors of the submitted manuscripts may receive from the Editorial Team formal recommendations or substantive guidelines before the texts are sent for review.

Each manuscript is sent to two independent external reviewers for evaluation (if possible, one abroad and one in Poland), and the review process is double blind. The reviewers are requested to complete a form in which they evaluate the following elements of the manuscript and provide a written justification of their remarks: weight and formulation of the research topic, appropriateness of the methodology, soundness of the argument, quality of language, and selection of sources.

These written reviews are the editors’ main criterion in their decision to publish; they can also help the authors to improve the quality of their works. The evaluation should be reliable, objective, impartial and properly justified; it should only refer to the work being assessed, not the authors themselves. The reviewers are obliged to inform the editors in the case of an identified conflict of interest. They are also obliged to inform the editors of unacknowledged use or incorporation of the work of other researchers in the evaluated manuscript. Reviewers are subject to the duty of confidentiality in relation to the review process, the content of the evaluated text, and the evaluation itself.

Both reviews end with an unambiguous recommendation that the evaluated manuscript be either accepted for publication (with or without corrections) or rejected. In the case of expressly divergent opinions of the reviewers, the manuscript is submitted to a third reviewer, who has no access to the other reviews.

Anonymous copies of the reviewers’ comments are sent to the authors, who are bound to address these comments by the indicated date. If necessary, the manuscript is sent to yet another reviewer for evaluation. After consulting the Advisory Board, the editorial team makes the final decision on the acceptance of a positively evaluated manuscript.

Editors of Romanica Wratislaviensia who submit their manuscripts for publication in the journal are subjected to the publishing procedures described above. Reviewers cannot have their own works published in the same issue as papers evaluated by themselves.

A list of reviewers is published in each issue of the journal, but with no indication of the evaluated contributions.

Refereeing template

Contact

Indexation

• EBSCO
• Erih Plus
• MIAR
• Cambridge Scientific Abstracts (CSA, ProQuest)
• The Central European Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities