REVIEW GUIDELINES AND REVIEWERS

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

All manuscripts submitted to the Journal are subject to a double-blind peer review (the identities of the Authors and the Reviewers are not disclosed). Two external Reviewers will assess manuscripts initially accepted by the Editors after a technical screening and verification of the thematic scope. 

Reviewers submit their reviews in writing, together with the declaration of potential conflicts of interest and information whether they discovered the identity of the Authors. Reviewer form is available at SIEŚW Review form.pdf.

The review is anonymous and confidential.

If the review is not satisfactory, Editors may invite additional reviewers or discuss the case internally. It is always the Editor-in-Chief who makes the final decision on any material to be published in the Journal.

The standard peer review applies to all full-length articles and review articles.

The conference materials will be published only if they meet the criteria of non-prepublication (see the paragraph Prepublication) and will be subject to the standard peer review procedure.

Articles written by Editors, members of the Board or anyone else having a potential conflict of interest with the Journal (that needs to be disclosed) will be subject to the standard peer review procedure conducted by the Board members and Reviewers who do not have such correlation with the Authors.

In the case of articles authored by the Editor-in-Chief, the review process is managed by one of the Deputy Editors who also makes the final decision.

All the decisions are impartial, independent, and based only on the quality of the submitted material, also in the case of special issues or supplements.

 

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE REVIEWERS:

The Journal follows the CSE guidelines concerning the Reviewers’ roles and responsibilities:

 

Responsibilities toward the Authors:

- Reviewers keep in confidence the details concerning the review process.

- They provide written, unbiased, and constructive feedback in a timely manner.

- They comment on the originality, accuracy, relevance, and linguistic competence of the article.

 

Responsibilities toward the Editors:

- Reviewers reply promptly to invitations.

- They disclose any conflict of interest, ethical concerns, bias, plagiarism, or any other misconduct discovered.

- They provide constructive criticism.

- They indicate the ways to improve the manuscript.

 

Responsibilities toward the Readers:

- Reviewers make sure that the presented research can be validated by the methods and analyses described in the manuscript.

- They make sure that the cited works are relevant and up to date.

 

REVIEW GUIDELINES

By submitting their manuscript, the Author agrees on the following procedure of assessment:

1. The Editorial Board carries out a preliminary assessment of the form and content of the manuscript.
2. If the preliminary assessment is positive, the Editorial Board transfers the text without disclosing its Author for it to be assessed by two external reviewers, who do not have any conflict with the Author. They cannot use any information on the reviewed manuscript prior to its publication.
3. Reviews are prepared on the peer review form SIEŚW Review form.pdf.
4. Following the reviewers’ conclusions, the Editorial Board decides on the manuscript publication, whilst reserving that the manuscript publication depends on whether the Author makes the modifications suggested by the Editorial Board on the basis of their own opinion and the reviewers’ comments.
5. The accepted text is edited as regards to its content and language correctness.
6. The review process takes up to three months.
7. A list of our reviewers can be found on the journal.

 

REVIEWERS

Ihar Bortnik (Polotsk State University, Belarus)
Andriy Danylenko (Pace University, USA) 

Jolanta Brzykcy (Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland)

Katarzyna Duda (Jagiellonian University, Poland)

Jerzy Gordziejew (Jagiellonian University, Poland)
Magnus Ilmjärv (Tallinn University, Estonia )
Małgorzata Kasner (Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland)

Michał Klimecki (Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland)

Aleksander Krawcewicz (University of Warsaw, Poland)
Taras Lylo (University of Lviv, Ukraina)
Dangiras Mačiulis (Lithuanian Institute of History, Lithuania)
Izabella Malej (University of Wrocław, Poland)

Grażyna Mańkowska (University of Warsaw, Poland)

Mirosława Michalska-Suchanek (University of Silesia in Katowice, Poland)

Antoni Mironowicz (University of Bialystok, Poland)

Wiktor Mojsijenko (Zhytomyr Ivan Franko State University, Ukraina)
Wanda K. Roman (Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland)
Monika Rzeczycka (University of Gdańsk, Poland)

Krzysztof Szatrawski (University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland)

Beata Waligórska-Olejniczak (Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland)

Jarosław Wołkonowski (University of Białystok, Poland)
Anatol Wialiki (Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland)