Reviewing procedure:

The reviewers complete a review form, which includes subject matter issues, research problems and their originality, evaluation of the research methods applied, proper selection of literature and the evaluation of the text in terms of linguistics and editorial correctness and the clarity of the message. A unified document (a review form), available at the “Prace Językoznawcze” website, helps the evaluations to be standardized. Taking into account the same parameters leads to an objective approach to the review.

Apart from the obligatorily evaluated elements included in the review form, the reviewer can present additional remarks in the form of a supplement to the form or comments to the manuscript. The completed form and additional remarks (if any) are, after removing personal data of the reviewer (for preserving anonymity), provided to the authors of the texts. Reviews and reviewers' remarks are not available to the general public.

If they suspect plagiarism, the reviewers should indicate the publications that were not cited in the manuscript although the content or ideas originating from them were used in the paper. Each mention concerning previous research should be marked with a reference to the source. The editor-in-chief should be notified about the significant resemblance of the reviewed material to other publications known to the reviewer and not mentioned in the text.

The review has a written form and ends with a clear conclusion to accept the paper for publication or to reject it. The review is presented in an editorial form. Negative reviews must contain justification for the opinion on rejecting the text. In case of detailed remarks, it is accepted to insert them in the comments to the manuscript. In such a case, the reviewers are obliged to remove metadata that might indicate their authorship.

Reviews are confidential. Their authors should not disclose their content to other persons. The only people authorized to know their content are: editor-in-chief, editor of the volume, members of the editorial board. The above mentioned persons are obliged to maintain confidentiality. It is forbidden for them to use the information, the ideas or data obtained from the reviewed manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

The editorial board takes care not to appoint reviewers with a conflict of interests with the author, i.e. direct personal relations (kinship, legal relations, conflict), professional reporting relations or direct research collaboration. If the reviewer suspects, based on the text or other reasons (e.g. the subject matter undertaken) the identity of the author and believes that a conflict of interests exists, the reviewer is obliged to immediately notify the editors about this fact. The editors resolve any doubts and, maintaining the anonymity of the author, notify the reviewer whether the conflict of interests really exists. If it is the case, the text is sent to another reviewer.

Review form





Does the title reflect the content of the paper?




Does the size of the paper match its contents?




Does the paper provide new insight into science?




Is the structure of the paper correct?




Are the research study methods appropriate?




Is the language of the paper correct? Does it meet the requirements for academic discourse?




Are the references selected and quoted correctly?




Does the summary accurately reflect the content of the paper?




Are the key words selected appropriately?




Can the paper be published?





Other comments: