RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE REFEREES

Independence and application of the double-blind peer review procedure

Each scientific article submitted for publication is reviewed by two independent external Reviewers. The procedure of double-blind peer review accepted by our Journal is the guarantee that neither the Contributor nor the appointed Reviewer can learn each other’s identity. If a Reviewer cannot prepare a review because of potential violation of the double-blind peer review procedure, they are obliged to instantly inform the Editorial Board of the fact.

Meeting deadlines and the form of a review

The appointed Reviewer should prepare a review within the time of 3 (three) weeks. If the Reviewer is not capable of preparing a review within the defined time limit, they are obliged to notify the Editorial Board as soon as possible. In such a case another Reviewer is appointed. The review should be rendered in the appropriate form, i.e. following the review sheet which is available on the Journal’s webpage.

Objectivism and evaluation of the reliability of the material submitted for publication

The reviews are aimed at evaluating the reliability of the submitted work and raising its scientific quality. They should be prepared in an objective manner, in accordance with the principles of editorial ethics, on the basis of scientific arguments and in compliance with the best of the Reviewer’s knowledge and their best will. All commentaries, suggestions and evaluations must be expressed in the way that leaves no doubts as to their justifiability and ought to be supported with arguments of the substantive nature.

The following are considered to be the basic guiding criteria and must be borne in mind while preparing a review:

• originality of the study,
• its scientific character,
• conformity with the profile of the Journal,
• the skill of formulating theses and proving them right or wrong,
• maturity of conducting a scientific discussion,
• the skill of formulating conclusions and opinions,
• proper making use of the available literature on the subject.

The specific principles of the reviewing procedure, which are accepted by Opolskie Studia Administracyjno-Prawne, are available on the Journal’s bookmark: Peer Review Process.

Verification of the originality of the material submitted for publication

The Reviewer informs the Editorial Board of each case of violation of the ethical principles binding in the Journal, in particular of their suspicion of any form of plagiarism being committed, indicating the reasons and the scope (including fragments of the text) which raise their objections. In the case where the Reviewer is familiar with the content of the text of the published work which was used by the author of the manuscript submitted for publication, they should notify the Editorial Board of the fact and justify their suspicions by presenting relevant evidence.

Confidentiality

All the works submitted for reviewing are treated as confidential material. Showing them to other people, discussing them, expressing views included in them as the Reviewer’s own ones, or a Reviewer’s availing themselves of the content included in the work being reviewed prior to its publication shall be treated as highly unethical. Still, the Reviewer is allowed to discuss the question of abiding by the editorial standards with the Editorial Board in order to make an assessment of the fact whether the principle of scientific reliability has been adhered to effectively.