For Reviewers
Peer Review Process
For the purpose of the evaluation of each submission, at least two independent scholars, whose institutional affiliation is different from that of the Author, are invited by the editorial board to act as peer-referees.
The author(s) of the submission and the Referees do not know their respective identities (double-blind review process); in special cases, in which the expertise needed precludes complete anonymity, the Referee signs a declaration of the lack of the conflict of interest. The conflict of interest takes place in the case of direct personal relations between the Referee and the Author(s) (especially kinship up to the twice-removed relatives level or marriage), professional hierarchical dependence, or recent direct academic collaboration.
Every written review includes the Referee’s unequivocal conclusion concerning the conditions of the acceptance or the rejection of the submission for publication.
The criteria for the acceptance or rejection of the submission as well as the review form are available to the public in the journal’s website.
In accordance with the principle of the double-blind reference, the names of the Referees of individual submission or issues of the journal are not disclosed; they are, however, listed at https://pjes.edu.pl/reviewers/ updated once a year in line with the regulations concerning the principles of journal ranking.
Referee’s responsibilities
The peer referee shall provide the Editors with information that will allow them to make an informed decision concerning the publication of the material.
The peer referee shall provide the Author(s) with relevant information allowing them to revise her contribution to meet the highest standards of academic quality or to improve their writing in the future.
The peer referee shall deliver his or her review promptly, or shall notify the Editor about any circumstances that prevent him or her from the timely delivery of the review. The expected turnover time is one month.
The peer referee shall be impartial in their evaluation of the submission.
The peer referee shall express his or her views clearly and unambiguously.
The peer referee shall never use ad-hominem arguments.
The peer referee shall not use the reference to strengthen their own academic or professional status.
The peer referee shall disclose to the Editor any conflict of interest. The peer referee shall decline the reference upon the discovery of any conflict of interest and shall inform the Editor about such instances.
The peer referee shall treat received all documents as confidential.
The referee is obliged to identify insufficient identification of sources or potential plagiarism, of which cases the referee shall notify the Editor.
Confidentiality
Until the moment of the admission of the article for publication, the editor and any editorial staff shall not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to any third party other than: corresponding author, peer referees, members of the editorial team, the publisher, copyeditors, proofreaders, typesetters involved in the production of the journal as appropriate.
Unpublished original material submitted to the journal shall never be used by the Editor or any party privy to the material prior to its publication (listed in the “Confidentiality” section of this document above) for their own research purposes without the author’s explicit written consent.