Peer review

Prior to peer review, all manuscripts are initially screened by the editors to determine the general suitability for the journal. Submissions that are found inadequate (style, length, subject matter, lack of originality) are rejected at this stage.

The journal operates double blind peer review policy. Suitable reviewers are selected by the editorial board to assure that no conflict of interest occurs.

The referees take the following issues into consideration:

  • originality of the paper (including methodology and data)
  • contribution to the field
  • suitability of methodology
  • adequate presentation of results
  • the soundness of the conclusions
  • correct and exhaustive response to reviewers’ earlier comments
  • observance of ethical issues
  • proper academic style and adequate language

The referees’ recommendations are sent to the author when both reviews are available. Depending on the nature of the changes, the modified version of the manuscript may be sent back to the reviewers for further suggestions and approval. The final decision to accept or reject the paper rests with the editor-in-chief or the handling editor. After acceptance of the final version, each paper is usually published in its pre-print version among “Articles in Press”, awaiting the completion of the current issue or any other later issue for which the paper may be deemed suitable.

The review process may take 3-5 months, depending on the reviewers’ availability.

Non-native writers in English are encouraged to have their texts proofread prior to final submission in order to ensure that the language meets the general standards of correctness. Please note that the journal does not provide linguistic advisory or proofreading services.