REVIEW PROCESS

All submitted full papers undergo a double-blind peer review process involving at least two reviewers. This means that the authors do not know the reviewers’ identities, and the reviewers do not know the authors’ identities. In the event that one reviewer gives a negative opinion, an additional (third) reviewer’s opinion is sought.

Once a full paper is received and all author-identifying information is removed from the document, the editor of the Proceedings sends the paper, along with a reviewer form, to two reviewers.

After the review is completed, the corresponding author will be informed of the review outcome, as well as of the reviewers’ comments and any required revisions.

If the reviewers’ requests involve minor, primarily technical changes without significant content alterations, the revised paper will be checked by a member of the Organizing Committee. However, if the reviewers’ requests involve substantial changes to the paper’s content, the revised paper will be returned to the reviewer for further evaluation. Once the reviewers’ revision requests have been met, the corresponding author will be notified of the paper’s acceptance for publication in the Proceedings. The paper will then be formatted and edited in accordance with the Proceedings’ technical requirements, and subsequently included in the Proceedings.

INSTRUCTIONS FOR REVIEWERS

Reviewers participate in making the decision on whether to accept a paper and help improve the quality of papers published in the Proceedings by reviewing the paper objectively, offering constructive feedback that will enhance the paper’s quality, and completing the review within a reasonable timeframe.

A reviewer should accept a review assignment only if they feel competent and knowledgeable enough to assess the quality of the paper based on its topic and the information it presents. Otherwise, the reviewer should inform the editor of the Proceedings as soon as possible (no later than five days after receiving the review request) that they are unable to assess the validity of the submitted paper.

Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to evaluate: the originality of the paper, the quality of the methodological approach, the clarity of the results presented, whether the conclusions are based on the results presented, adherence to ethical principles in preparing the paper (with special emphasis on plagiarism), the manner in which references are cited and whether relevant references for the specific scientific field are included, as well as whether the paper contributes to the development of knowledge within its field.

Proofreading is not part of the review process, but reviewers are encouraged to suggest stylistic or linguistic corrections if needed.

Reviewers must keep confidential all information provided by the editor or the authors of the paper, must not retain or copy the manuscript, must not disclose any details about the manuscript or its review during or after the review process, and must not use information obtained during the review process for personal or third-party benefit or to disadvantage or discredit others.

Reviewers should inform the editor about any published or submitted content that is substantially similar to that under review.

Reviewers should be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from hostile, defamatory, or disparaging personal remarks.