1. All texts submitted to the journal undergo a reviewing process.
  2. Papers are reviewed by two independent external reviewers who are not connected to the University of Bialystok and the author’s affiliation, and who are not members of the editorial team or the scientific board of the journal. Reviews take written form and are based on the template (link). Articles are accepted for publication when they receive two positive reviews (with clear recommendations). In case of contradicting opinions, the editorial board makes the final decision; they also have a right to appoint a third reviewer.
  3. Authors' complaints or appeals regarding reviews are considered by the Editor-in-chief and the Editorial Board.
  4. Both authors and reviewers do not know each other’s identities (double-blind peer-reviewing process). The names of the reviewers for a particular publication are not disclosed at any stage. Once a year, the editorial board publishes a list of reviewers cooperating with the journal.
  5. The editorial board cannot appoint reviewers who may have direct involvement with the authors, such as direct reporting line or personal relationships. It is the duty of the reviewers to inform the Editor-in-chief if there is a suspicion of a potential conflict of interest with the author(s) of the reviewed works, resulting from collaboration or any other mutual relationship with the author(s).
  6. If reviewers are not qualified to prepare an opinion on a text, they should inform the Editor-in-chief and refuse to review the work.
  7. Reviewers are required to prepare their reviews impartially and objectively, solely on the basis of the scientific value of the materials. The review should be fair and constructive. Reviewers should justify their assessment of the work, personal criticism of the author(s) of the submitted material is not allowed.
  8. All reviewed texts are confidential. Reviewers may not disclose in any way the content of their reviews or the content of the materials they review. They also must not use the contents of reviewed, as yet unpublished papers in their research. Reviewers cannot use papers under consideration for personal or competitive gain.
  9. The Reviewers treat the standards developed by the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), along with the Scholar Code of Ethics of a as a point of reference for the purposes of this Code of Ethics and Conduct. The adopted standards are in line with the guidelines developed by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education.
  10. Reviewers are obliged to inform the Editor-in-chief of any possibility of violation of ethical standards.
  11. All cases of suspected plagiarism are carefully analyzed by the Editor-in-chief and the Editorial Board. The handling of cases of plagiarism is in accordance with the instructions of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and depends on the degree of copying (the work is rejected, a decision may be made to contact the publisher of the copied work and the institution the author represents).
  12. The Editor-in-chief and the Editorial Board also check for other types of research misconduct, fraud and author dishonesty (e.g., "ghostwriting," "guest authorship," data falsification). If the suspicion is confirmed, the work is rejected.