Review Rules
1. Since 2019, Aluna Publishing House has been using a publishing panel that streamlines editorial work from the moment the manuscript was submitted through the review process to the preparation of the article for printing. The review process is as follows:
A. The editorial team reads the submitted article. The article is reviewed by a thematic editor. A decision is made:
– reject the paper,
– the need for authors to correct perceived deficiencies; after correcting such paper may be subject to external review,
– subject the paper to external reviews.
B. In the event of rejection of the paper without a review, the Editors return all received materials to the authors and delete their copies that may have been created in earlier stages of the publishing process.
C. In the event of a request to correct the deficiencies found in the study, the Editorial Board sets a deadline for the authors to submit a corrected paper. If the authors fail to meet the deadline, the Editorial Board may withdraw from further work on the article.
D. In the case of an initial positive evaluation of the work, the article is directed through an editorial panel to an external reviewer in a given scientific field.
E. The Editorial Board expects the reviewer to complete a descriptive review and complete a review sheet. The review sheet is available in the editorial panel and on the journal’s website. The reviewer in the review sheet qualifies the work for publication without the necessary corrections, for publication after making the indicated changes, or decides to reject the work. In special cases, the reviewer may indicate the need to re-review after rewriting the work.
F. The editors include the article in the publishing plan after a positive review by an external reviewer and after the author introduces any amendments that the reviewer considers necessary. In the event of a negative review by an external reviewer, the article will be rejected by the Editorial Board and will not be published.
2. Aluna Publishing House applies the double-blind peer review principle. Personal data of the authors are not disclosed to reviewers. Reviewers of the work are anonymous to authors. The obtained reviews are stored in the Editorial Office’s internal documentation. At the end of the year, a collective list of reviews cooperating with the Editorial Board in a given year is published on the journal’s website.
3. The reviewer pledges to:
– cooperate with the Editorial Board in the scope of improving the reviewed material;
– careful and objective assessment of the entrusted works, obeying the fair play principle,
– confidentiality – not sharing the paper with third parties
– perform a review within the set deadline or informing in advance about the inability to meet the deadline,
– not undertake reviews in the event of a conflict of interest with authors
– not use reviews and the work itself for its own purposes.
4. The reviewers pledge to comply with the Ethics Rules in the review process and accept the Review Rules applied by Aluna Publishing House.
Ⓒ 2019 Aluna