Submitted articles, miscellaneous sources and reviews are initially evaluated by the Editorial Team. If the submitted materials do not meet the criteria of an adequate scientific level, they are rejected and returned to the author. If the materials are accepted for further processing, articles and miscellaneous sources are sent to two reviewers who represent two different research facilities (they cannot represent the author’s research entity).

The reviewers should have at least a habilitated doctor degree and/or be specialists in the field of the submitted text. In special cases, texts can also be reviewed by doctors. Reviewers should be experts in the same field as the text they review. To ensure high ethical standards, the reviews are written followingdouble blind review policy. The text should be reviewed in terms of content. If ethical circumstances arise which make review impossible, a reviewer should not continue working on it.

A review should be written and concluded with acceptance or rejection of an article. If a work receives two positive reviews, it is submitted for publication. If one review is negative, the Editorial Team can appoint another reviewer who makes a final decision on the acceptance or rejection of the text. The author receives a review of their text and must make necessary corrections indicated by reviewers, unless they prove that the suggested changes are not justified. If a reviewer determines that the corrected text must be reviewed one more time before publication, he/she receives the text again.

Any failure to ensure scientific reliability, such as ghostwriting (failure to reveal the real authors) and guest authorship (including authors who have not contributed to the text) will be exposed. Information about them will be published and the original unit and other scientific entities will be notified.

Contact

Indexation

• Erih Plus
• CEEOL
• The Central European Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (CEJSH)
• Biblioteka Nauki
• BazHum