+A
Increase text
-a
Decrease text

Article review

Terms of review a scientific article published in Biuletyn Instytutu Spawalnictwa

  1. The articles are reviewed by the Program Council members;
  2. The evaluation of an article is made by at least 2 independent reviewers outside the institution represented by author;
  3. In case of articles written in a foreign language, at least one of the reviewers is affiliated in the external institution other than author's nationality;
  4. The reviewer cannot be both an author of the text published in the same number than the reviewed article;
  5. The reviewer is obliged to sign a statement excluding conflict of interests between an author and reviewer, which is understood as:
    • Direct personal connection (family connection, law connection, conflict),
    • Superior - subordinate relation,
    • Direct scientific/research cooperation for 2 years before making a review;
  6. The names of reviewers of particular publication are not revealed;
  7. Biuletyn Instytutu Spawalnictwa publishes a list of the reviewers once a year;
  8. The terms of review a scientific article and the review form ale available to download below.

Review procedure

  1. The author delivers the text of his article to the Biuletyn's Editorial Board (electronic version);
  2. Managing Editor turns the article over the reviewer, who is indicated by the Subject Editor;
  3. The reviewer expresses the remarks, suggestions, including:
    • Accordance title to the content,
    • Accordance abstract to the content,
    • Innovations presented in the article,
    • Terminological correctness,
    • References' actuality,
    • Tables and pictures content;
  4. After expressing the remarks the reviewer gives an opinion about:
    • Purpose to publishing the article in the original shape,
    • Purpose to publishing the article with the modifications,
    • Purpose to publishing the article in a short version,
    • Lack of purpose to publishing the article;
  5. The Managing Editor delivers the reviewers opinion to the author;
  6. The author refers to the reviewer's suggestions, accounts the remarks or consults it directly with the reviewer;
  7. After considering reviewer's suggestions or after direct consultations between author and reviewer, the reviewer expresses the ultimate opinion (written) allowing the article to be published.
Download: 
review
23 May 2017 doc, 138.50 KB
Download
review
23 May 2017 pdf, 223.06 KB
Download