Evaluation process

The evaluation of the papers will be made by two experts, independent or affiliated with institutions other than those of the authors, who will verify the compliance with the publication rules and will make suggestions and improvement ideas. The evaluation will follow the procedures of single-blind review and will be done accordingly with the evaluation grid.

Both the Editorial Board and the reviewers can make requests for the authors to review the texts and/or the illustrations prior to publication. These issues will be resolved before the actual editing of the materials. Similar requests may be made with respect to the grammatical or linguistic accuracy.

The articles received by the editorial team will be taken over by the editor-in-chief or the editorial office secretary who will send copies of them (paper or electronic copies) to reviewers (experts in the respective field).

The reviewers will evaluate the article according to the grid and will return it to the editorial office, which will send the comments to the author.

The evaluation of the reviewers must include at the end one of the following recommendations for the article analyzed:

• the unconditional acceptance of the article;
• the acceptance of the article subject to the changes mentioned in the report;
• the rejection of the article.

If the reports are opposed as a recommendation, the editor may request the opinion of a third referent.

Evaluation criteria

During the review process, the following evaluation criteria will be taken into account (download):

• the compliance with the publication rules and the structure of the article;
• the thematic compliance of the articles with the profile of the journal;
• the quality of the scientific content;
• the degree of originality;
• the clarity, concision and accuracy of the text of the article;
• the absence of errors, misconceptions and ambiguities;
• the relevance of bibliographic sources.

Apart from the evaluation process, the authors will receive one or more corrections, on a case-by-case basis, depending on the problems identified by the editor, in pdf format, where they will see any observations and requests. In this file the authors will insert their own observations, with “comment”.