Peer-review process (double blind)

For authors

Before print and website publication, the articles will be reviewed by two evaluators following the criteria mentioned in the review form. The authors are responsible for checking whether the articles prepared for publication meet these criteria, but also whether they comply with the editing norms (before submitting them to publishers). Once received by the editors, written contributions will be sent to the reviewers. After the articles have been read and analysed, they will be sent along with comments and suggested changes to the editors.

Authors are informed by editors about the results of the review process and will receive suggestions for improving the initial proposal. In this situation, the authors resubmit the revised material, which will be subject to second analysis.

If the authors disagree with the suggestions/ indications of the evaluators, they will communicate directly with them (with the permission of the latter) or firstly with the editors.

All debates must be completed and the final version of the article must be submitted by the date set by the editors. If the status of the discussion and revision of the article is not completed by that date or if the authors refuse to materialize the suggestions received, the article will not be published.

For reviewers

The peer review process is based on the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Evaluators are asked to use the review form to evaluate the articles received from the editors. If they want to include other comments, they can submit them in the specific section of the form or directly in the article (by the Insert comment command).

The review form (along with the article with inserted comments) will be submitted to the editors within four weeks from receiving the articles. Reviewers will choose one of the recommendations indicated in the form: accepted without revision, accepted with revision, rejected.

If the two reviewers disagree and do not reach a consensus, they will convey to all those involved in the drafting of the article so that the final version of the scientific contribution is sent to the editors in time. If the debates do not end by that date, the article in question will not be published.

Reviewers have the responsibility to inform the editors in writing (by e-mail) in case they cannot comply with the requirements. Depending on the nature of the non-alignment to the COPE requirements, the editors are free to submit the article to another evaluators.