Scientific review procedure

The procedure of reviewing scientific articles published in scientific journals published by University Publishing House of the WSG University in Bydgoszcz

The review procedure in the Publishing Group of the WSG University in Bydgoszcz takes into account the recommendations of the Republic of Poland Ministry of Science and Higher Education described in the publication Good practices in review procedures in science (MNiSW, 2011) - publication available at the link: [Good practices in review procedures in science].

 

The course of the procedure:

  1. Submitted texts are evaluated in formal terms (providing the required documentation and compliance with publishing rules) and substantive (compliance with the publishing house's profile) in the first place by the Editorial Board.
  2. After approval by the Editorial Board or making changes suggested by the Editorial Board, the text is sent to the reviewers.
  3. At least two independent reviewers from outside the research unit affiliated by the author of the text are appointed. The editors make every effort to ensure that the reviewers are not employees (within the meaning of the labor law) in the unit issuing the publication. The editors ensure that the person of the reviewer does not remain in a professional relationship or in close personal relations or kinship or affinity relations with the person whose text is subject to review.
  4. The editorial staff selects reviewers in terms of their reliability and appropriate competence in a given field.
  5. A person receiving a proposal to prepare a review is obliged to carefully assess their substantive competence and practical possibilities of preparing a review within the time limit set by the Editorial Board.
  6. An agreement is signed with the reviewer, which includes the reviewer's statement that there are no circumstances specified in point 4. The contract contains formal requirements relating to the review.
  7. In the event that circumstances of a conflict of interest occur during the review process or circumstances occur that make the parties to the proceedings suspected of such a conflict of interest, the reviewer is obliged to immediately notify the Editorial Board of this fact.
  8. The editors refrain from probing the reviewer's opinion or exerting pressure on him - both in the period preceding the conclusion of the contract for the preparation of the review, and during its performance by the reviewer.
  9. The editors make every effort to ensure that authors and reviewers do not know each other's identities (double blind review process).
  10. The review is in writing and ends with an application for admission, conditional admission or refusal to publish the text.
  11. The authors are informed about the results of the review and are obliged to include the comments contained therein in the final form of the text.
  12. The editors reserve the right to appoint additional reviewers in cases where there are contentious situations.