Instructions for Reviewers
A guide for reviewers (procedure)

1. Each research article is subject to peer-review.
2. Two independent peer-reviewers who are outside the parent unit represented by Author(s) of this article are appointed for review, at the same time at least one of the Reviewers is affiliated with a foreign institution, different than the nationality of the Author of this article.
3. Thematic Editors are responsible for a proper selection of Reviewers. The basis for the selection of a proper Reviewer is his/her knowledge which is proved by their significant scientific achievements and a reputation for reliability. The Editorial Board will strive to avoid any conflict of interests between Reviewers and Author(s) (direct personal / professional connection, direct scientific cooperation within past two years prior to the development of the review).
4. A potential Reviewer receives by means of an Online Article Submission System, referred to as System a question concerning whether he/she commits himself/herself to review the article. At this stage, the Editorial Board is obliged to provide the Reviewer with a brief information on the reviewed manuscript: abstract, volume of the manuscript. On the basis of the information, the Reviewer decides within 7 days whether accept or reject the manuscript for a review.
5. The basis for beginning the review is a contract of specified work between the Publisher and the Reviewer. The contract of specified work is drawn on the basis of a template approved by the Publisher which is available on the System.
6. The deadline for carrying out the review is flexible but in overall we expect it to be 30 days of the date of signature of the contract unless the Parties agree otherwise.
7. Signing the contract of specified work (a review) by both Parties is the basis for handing the manuscript to the Reviewer.
8. Receipt of the review should take place within the time-limit recorded in the contract. Reviewer’s Form and Work Completion Certificate are documents which confirm that the Publisher has received the review. Remuneration for the completed service is paid on the basis of Certificate Completion and an invoice.
9. Template of the Reviewer’s Opinion is available on the journal’s website. The review should be in written form. It should explicitly conclude whether an article is accepted or rejected for publication.
10. A condition for an article to be released are two positive reviews. In case of just one negative review, the article is passed on to a third Reviewer.
11. During the whole review process, Publisher commits himself/herself to maintain strict confidentiality concerning the third Reviewer, his/her remuneration, the contents of the review itself, access to the contents of the review by third party on the basis of double-blind review).
12. Once a year, Publisher publishes a list of reviewers cooperating with the journal.
13. The final decision on publication of the article which received a positive opinion of the Reviewers is undertaken by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal or his deputy.