1. The Editorial Board assesses the article for form and content.
  2. At least two independent reviewers are called to evaluate each publication. The reviewers must not be affiliated with the author's academic entity.
  3. The authors and the reviewers have no knowledge of their identity (double-blind review). In all other cases the reviewer signs a no-conflict-of-interest declaration.
  4. The review has written form and concludes with a clear statement of either acceptance or rejection of the publication.
  5. The criteria for the acceptance or rejection of the publication are available in the tab "Review Form".
  6. The statistics editor analyses and controls the article as to the correctness of the statistical methods applied by the authors.
  7. The list of reviewers is publicised annually on the quarterly's website. The names of the reviewers for particular issues are not disclosed.
  8. The Editorial Board emphasizes that ghostwriting or guest authorship are considered to be a manifestation of scientific misconduct and all the detected cases will be unmasked, including notification of the relevant actors (authors' associations, scientific and academic associations, editors' associations)
  9. The reviewing procedure complies with the recommendations of the Ministry of Higher Education and Science, included in: Dobre praktyki w procedurach recenzyjnych w nauce.

collegiumbobolanum