Guidelines for Reviewers
The quality of a scientific journal is directly reflected in the quality of its reviewers. We greatly appreciate the time and effort that the reviewers devote to the review process.
Contributions that are sent to our journal must undergo a double-blind review process to guarantee their soundness, quality, originality and other qualitative characteristics. Each submission is reviewed by at least two reviewers. Performing a review involves the following:
- Evaluation of a number of qualitative indicators by filling in an electronic form (eg quality, scientific contribution, interest for readers, etc.)
- Evaluation of the overall status of the manuscript and recommendations to the editor. The overall editor recommendation may include the following options:
- Accept the current form. Manuscript has no shortcomings.
- Accept after minor revision. The manuscript contains minor flaws that the reviewer specifies in the comments for authors. The author has two weeks to incorporate the changes.
- Request major revision and reassess manuscript after editing. The manuscript contains major flaws that the reviewer specifies in the comments for authors. Authors will be asked for detailed responses to reviewers' comments. Authors have four weeks to finish the revision. The reviewer is then asked to review the changes.
- Rejection. The manuscript is of insufficient quality or contains serious conceptual flaws.
- Provide detailed and constructive comments and recommendations for authors. Your comments will be used to assist the author(s) in revising his/her/their manuscript. Comments and recommendations for authors should first summarize the entire manuscript (one paragraph), then specify the major comments and finally point out the specific shortcomings of the paper (with reference to a specific line or element in the manuscript). Do not reveal your name in your comments; these comments may be passed on directly to the author.
- The default deadline for the review is 14 days from the acceptance of the review request. The reviewer will be notified if the review has not been prepared by then. In case of non-communication by the reviewer, the review may be canceled.
Request a review
Each reviewer that has been addressed has the option to reject the review request (due to time, topic, or conflict of interest). A reviewer decides whether or not to accept a review based on the manuscript's title, abstract, and keywords. The reviewer has 7 days to decide whether to accept or reject the review request. Before the end of this deadline, the reviewer will be notified of the impending decision. The reviewer has the option to request an extension of this period. Upon expiry of the deadline, the request for review is automatically withdrawn. If the reviewers decide to complete the review, they have the option to choose a date by which they will do so (up to 14 days). If the reviewers carries out a review within 2 week, they are entitled to a discount voucher of 40 EUR (1100 CZK) for the future submission (APC). The discount voucher is valid for 2 years.
The manuscript should be original and contain only results that have not been published yet. If a part of the manuscript contain text from another source, it must contain a suitable quote.
If the reviewer discovers any ethical issues with the manuscript (plagiarism, fraud), they are asked to contacts the editor and specify the problem.
In the event of a subsequent conflict of interest, the reviewer is also asked to contact the editor.
Reviews are submitted to the authors as they were prepared. There are no corrections or adjustments made by the editor, so reviewers are asked for factual comments using the appropriate language.