PEER REVIEW
Description of the peer review process
The type of review undertaken by the Journal is that of double blind peer-review: two persons who do not know the identity of the author review each article. The authors do not know the identity of the reviewers either. Experts review the article according to the quality indicators specified in this form:
REVIEW
of article No. ________ entitled (the title of the article) submitted for publication in the
“DIALOGICA. Cultural Studies and Literature Scientific Journal”
| No. | Criteria | Conclusions |
| 1 | Scientific novelty and originality of the article, inclusion in the editorial policy and in the concept of the journal | |
| 2. | Appropriate wording of the title of the article, concordance with the content and bibliographical references | |
| 3. | Relevance of the abstract and key-words | |
| 4. | Scientific quality, compliance with the structure of a scientific article | |
| 5. | Coherence of methodology and proper use of theoretical language | |
| 6. | Theoretical interpretation and analysis, critical involvement of the author | |
| 7. | Argumentation of purpose and conclusions | |
| 8. | Relevance of the sources and bibliographical references | |
| 9. | Stylistic and graphic presentation of the article | |
| 10. | Recommendations | Accepted Or: Conditionally accepted (remarks) Or: Rejected |
| 11. | Reviewer: Name, surname date/ signature |
The results of the review are discussed at the meetings of the editorial board. The article is accepted for publication if it corresponds to one of these options:
– Both reviewers give a positive opinion and recommend it for publication;
– If one of the reviewers gives a negative opinion, the article is sent for review to a third reviewer. Based on the opinion of this third reviewer, the editorial board makes a decision.
If the author improves his rejected article, the procedure is resumed.
The term of review is at least six months.