Ethical principles for reviewers


  • Contribution to editorial decisions: The reviewer assists the editor in making editorial decisions and may also help authors to improve the paper.
  • Standards of objectivity: The review shall be conducted objectively. Referees should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
  • Promptness: The reviewer who feels unqualified to review the assigned paper or knows that its timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the editor and excuse himself or herself from the review process.
  • Confidentiality: The confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal must be protected. The reviewer must not disclose any information about the submitted paper to anyone except those authorized by the editor.
  • Acknowledgement of sources: The reviewer should immediately notify the editor of any similarities between the paper under review and another paper either published or under consideration by another journal. Moreover, the paper containing falsified data shall also be immediately called to the editor’s attention.
  • Disclosure and conflict of interest: The reviewer shall not use any part of data or work reported in submitted and as yet unpublished papers without written consent of author. Moreover, the reviewer shall recuse himself or herself from processing papers if he or she has any conflict of interest with any of the authors or institutions related to the paper.
  • Double-blind review process - Reviewers and authors remain unknown to each other. After the initial qualification of the work for print, the work is signed only with a title.