Instructions for Reviewers
The peer review process ensures a high-quality and objective evaluation of the submitted texts and is a key tool for the journal when deciding whether to accept or reject a manuscript. Accordingly, peer review provides feedback to the authors about possible improvements to be able to publish their manuscripts without reservation.
The manuscripts submitted for publication in the peer-reviewed section of the journal should be evaluated by (at least) two independent reviewers, experts in the field. The reviewers are always contacted by the editors. The editorial board recommends the reviewers based on the topic discussed in the article.
The reviewers and authors of the manuscripts remain anonymous to one another.
The reviews are internal documents of the editorial team and are archived.
The reviewer can refuse to proceed with an evaluation of the manuscript due to a possible conflict of professional interests (see Publication Ethics – Responsibilities of Reviewers).
The reviewer may not redistribute the submitted manuscript, provide it to third parties, or misuse the information or findings therein for personal or other purposes.
The reviewer should follow the editorial guidelines and meet the submission deadline. The standard turnaround time is two to three weeks.
The review, or the manuscript, consists of the reviewer’s clearly stated comments, both specific and general. The conclusion should state explicitly whether the text can be published and under what conditions. The reviewer should notify the author about any missing significant published titles on the discussed topic.
Please use the attached form to write a review and submit it to the editorial office by e-mail or by post.
The reviewers will not be remunerated but will receive the relevant issue of the journal.
The Review Form is available here.