Reviewers are required to comply with Ethical Standards. The journal adheres to the principles and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

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. During the initial editorial assessment, manuscripts are evaluated for originality, relevance to the journal’s scope, scientific quality, methodological soundness, and compliance with editorial guidelines. 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. The Editorial Office ensures that all manuscripts are anonymized before being sent to reviewers. Reviewers do not receive any information that could reveal the identity of the authors, and authors do not receive information that could identify the reviewers.

5. Reviewers use the accepted online form. The review form is available to the public on the journal's website. Reviewers assess manuscripts based on the following criteria: originality and scientific contribution, clarity of objectives, adequacy of methodology, quality of data and analysis, validity of conclusions, structure and clarity of presentation, and relevance to the journal’s thematic scope.

Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the Editorial Board may issue one of the following decisions:
– The paper may be accepted in the present form
– The paper should be accepted after minor corrections
– The paper should be accepted after substantial corrections indicated
– The paper should be rejected.

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.

The reviewers are requested to consider the following problems, whether:

11. All reviewers are required to declare any potential conflicts of interest, including personal, academic, or financial relationships with the authors. Reviewers who identify a conflict of interest must withdraw from the review process. Authors and editors are also required to disclose any conflicts of interest relevant to the submitted work.

12. All submitted manuscripts are checked for plagiarism using professional similarity detection software  (iThenticate). Manuscripts with excessive similarity or evidence of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or data manipulation are rejected. Cases of unethical behavior are handled in accordance with COPE guidelines.