Reviewers are required to comply with Ethical Standards.

Reviews constitute an essential element of research, providing not only an objective verification of the quality of presented results and outcomes but also indicating the potential for improvements in terms of applied methodology, presented interpretations, or technical aspects of a given study. 

 

Principles of reviewing scientific articles in the Acta Scientiarum Polonorum. Oeconomia
1. The scientific journal Acta Scientiarum Polonorum Oeconomia publishes original scientific papers corresponding to its profile.

2. Papers that do not comply with the Acta Scientiarum Polonorum Oeconomia profile are rejected during the initial evaluation, and the Author is informed that the article is not allowed for further evaluation (desk decision).

3. Two independent reviewers outside the Author's organization are appointed to evaluate each publication.

4. The review is done using the "double-blind review process", meaning that reviewers and authors do not know each other's identities.

5. Reviewers use the accepted online form. The review form is available to the public on the journal's website.

6. If the reviewers suggest corrections to the Author, the Editorial Board shall forward the reviewers' comments to the Author.

7. If the article received two negative reviews, the Editorial Board informs the Authors, and the article is not published.

8. When an article has received two highly different reviews, the Editing Committee and the Scientific Council of the journal can decide on publication.

9. The names of the reviewers of the individual issues are not disclosed, and a list of reviewers is published once a year LIST OF REVIEWERS | Acta Scientiarum Polonorum. Oeconomia. Reviewers are selected from among recognized scholars and specialists in the relevant field who are not in a conflict of interest with the authors.

10. The journal requires that reviews be objective, substantive, and constructive, supporting authors in improving their manuscripts. Reviewers should substantiate their opinions with appropriate scientific arguments. The content of the review is treated as confidential.