I. The review procedure takes place according to the following rules:

 - at least two independent reviewers from outside the scientific board affiliated to the Author of the publication are appointed to evaluate each publication,

- the Author or Authors of the publication and Reviewers do not know each other' identities (double-blind review process); in other cases, the Reviewer signs a declaration of no conflict of interest, where a conflict of interest is considered to be a direct personal relationship (in particular, second degree kinship or marriage), professional subordination or direct scientific cooperation during the last two years preceding the year of preparation of the review,

- a written review contains an explicit request of the Reviewer to accept or reject the article for publication,

- the criteria for eligibility or rejection of publications and the review form are made public on the journal's website or in each issue of the journal,

- the list of reviewers of the journal is available on the journal's website (below).

II. Detailed description:

1. Upon receipt of an article, the scientific editor of a given issue of the journal confirms receipt, which is not equivalent to acceptance for print, and then checks whether the article meets the criteria for eligibility for publication.
2. After a preliminary opinion of the Editorial Board, the texts are sent for review.
3. In cooperation with the editor-in-chief and after consultation with the thematic and language editor, the scientific editor of a given issue of the journal selects reviewers from the list of reviewers available on the website of the journal. Due to the interdisciplinary nature of the publication, the Editorial Board also appoints reviewers from outside the list, whose names are then included in the given issue of the journal.
4. Two independent reviewers from outside the scientific board affiliated to the Author are appointed to evaluate each text. The Reviewer must not be the author of the text in this issue of the journal for which he or she is preparing a review.
5. The review procedure is anonymous. Authors and reviewers do not know each other' identity (double-blind review process).
6. The scientific editor of a given issue of the journal sends texts to Reviewers and sets a deadline for their review submissions.
7. Reviews are submitted in the written form, are drawn up in accordance with the form below and contain an unambiguous recommendation to accept or reject the text for print (Review form).
8. If the reviews do not require the Author to make any substantive changes, but only suggest minor editorial ones, the scientific editor of a given issue of the journal shall submit the article for publication.
9. If the review contains critical remarks, the scientific editor of a given issue of the journal shall provide the Author with the relevant information and the Author shall make corrections. If the Author does not agree with the reviewer's comments, s/he is obliged to prepare a written response to the review.
10. Only texts that have received two positive reviews may be sent for publication. However, positive conclusions are not tantamount to accepting the article for publication. The decision to accept the article for publication is made by the Editorial Board of the journal, based on the best knowledge related to the shape and idea of the issue as well as the expected results of the publication.
11. In the case of one positive and one negative review, the final decision to submit the text for publication is made by the Editorial Council of the journal, which may appoint a third independent reviewer to get acquainted with his or her opinion.
12. After completion of the review procedure, the scientific editor of a given issue of the journal notifies the Authors of the texts about accepting or rejecting their articles for publication (in the latter case no justification is provided).
13. The review procedure is supervised by the editor-in-chief of the journal.
14. The reviews received are kept confidential by the journal's secretary.
15. After responding to the comments of the Reviewers, the Author is obliged to send the updated text of the article and the correctly filled in "Author's Statement" (click here for download). For texts without illustrations, a scan of the first two pages - filled in and signed - must be sent back to the editorial office; for texts containing illustrations, the Author is also obliged to fill in the third page of the statement (instructions for illustrations available at https://wydawnictwo.us.edu.pl/node/2301).
16. The scientific editor of the issue states whether the Author has taken into account the Reviewer's comments and accepts the text for publication (or rejects it). Then, the text is submitted for the publishing process.