In order to ensure the highest quality of work published in Acta Iuris Stetinensis the journal follows a multi-step review procedure.
Submitted manuscripts are first examined in terms of formal requirements by associate editors. If necessary, papers are sent back to the authors with a request to adjust their work to the journal’s formal requirements set out in Submission guidelines.
Authors’ names and affiliations are removed from the manuscripts as well as file properties by associate editors for the purpose of the review process.
Preliminary internal review
Editor-in-Chief together with the Subject Editor analyse the manuscript to make sure the paper’s subject matter falls under the thematic scope of Act Iuris Stetinensis and to ensure the paper’s originality (using anti-plagiarism software).
Should plagiarism or self-plagiarism be detected, having exhausted the ethics procedure, the editorial team may reject the manuscript and notify Author’s affiliation about the incident.
Two external reviewers not affiliated with the Author’s institution are appointed.
The assessment of manuscripts is based on the following criteria: the subject-matter, method, substantive content, form.
The reviewer may provide notes for the Author, suggestions for revision and reasons for the evaluation.
The reviewer presents their recommendations: manuscript to be accepted for publication (as is or after substantive revision, comprehensive re-writing, supplementing and extending research) or manuscript to be rejected.
The reviewer draws up the review within one month from receipt of the manuscript.
In cases of doubt the decision about publication is made by the editorial board based on the reviews. A third reviewer might be asked to submit their opinion on the manuscript. Should one of the reviews be negative, the paper will be rejected.
Sending reviews to Authors
Authors are sent reviews of their manuscripts.
If a Reviewer recommends that changes should be made to the manuscript, the Author should revise the paper according to the Reviewer’s comments within two weeks from receipt of the review.
Decision on publishing manuscripts
Revised manuscripts are sent to Reviewers if the original review stated that re-assessment after revision was necessary.
After approval from the Reviewers or Editor-in-Chief and Subject Editor (if the manuscript was not sent for re-assessment) the paper proceeds to publication.
Should the Author fail to revise the manuscript according to the Reviewer’s comments or should the revised paper not be granted approval from the Reviewer/Editor-in-Chief and Subject Editor, the manuscript will be rejected.
All stages of the review procedure (both internal and external) ensure anonymity. The journal applies the double-blind review process, which means that the Reviewers do not know whose paper they are assessing and the Authors, even after their manuscripts have been accepted for publication, do not know the identity of Reviewers.