Reviewer Guidelines

Review Purpose

The purpose of the review is to assist the Editor-in-Chief in making the final decision and to improve the quality of the manuscript through communication with the authors.

The main task of the reviewers is to assess each submitted manuscript, thereby contributing to the enhancement and maintenance of the journal’s high scientific and research standards, as well as the quality of the authors’ articles.

Anonymity and Confidentiality of Review

The Journal of the Institute of Criminological and Sociological Research uses double-blind review.

Reviewers work independently and anonymously. Their identities are unknown to each other, except when both parties express a willingness to engage in direct communication.

All editorial board members and secretariat staff are obligated to maintain the anonymity of the review process. The content and the review procedure are considered confidential. Reviewers, as well as the editorial board members, must not disclose any details of this process to third parties.

Each manuscript is treated as a confidential document, and no information about it should be disclosed unless explicitly approved by the Editor-in-Chief for the purpose of obtaining an objective assessment of the text. Reviewers must not use unpublished material from submitted papers for their research without the written permission of the authors, and information and ideas presented in submitted papers must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

Review Process

Manuscripts are sent for review after an initial assessment of their suitability for publication in the journal, taking into account their form and thematic scope. Special attention is paid to ensuring that the initial evaluation does not take longer than necessary. Authors receive information about the outcome of the initial manuscript assessment and the decision about initiation of the review process through a designated correspondence person.

The Editor-in-Chief assigns the manuscript to reviewers independently or based on the suggestions of editorial board members.

When a request for a review is made, reviewers receive the reviewer guidelines along with a review form. Reviewers are provided with deadlines to confirm their acceptance of the review request and to complete the review.

Each reviewer receives the manuscript text without the authors’ names and is required to confirm document receipt and their readiness to conduct the review within the specified timeframe.

Upon confirmation, the reviewer compiles the review either by completing the review form or in the form of a text that clearly and unambiguously addresses the key questions from the review form and provides their expert opinion and/or scientific evaluation of the manuscript, along with suggestions for categorising the work.

The review follows a standard format that includes evaluations of the manuscript’s individual dimensions, a written explanation of the ratings, suggestions for the authors, a final recommendation to the editors, and comments on the manuscript directed to the Editor-in-Chief. If the reviewers believe the manuscript deserves publication with revisions, they must specify how this can be achieved.

Reviewers evaluate the manuscripts in terms of the congruence of content with the profile of the Journal of the Institute of Criminological and Sociological Research, the significance and relevance of the issues addressed, the adequacy of the methods applied, the scientific value and originality of the information presented, the soundness of interpretations and conclusions, the style and clarity of idea presentation, the text’s structure, and formatting.

The review must conclude with a clear message to the Editor-in-Chief regarding the further handling of the reviewed manuscript, along with the final assessment: publish, publish with minor revisions, major revisions needed and re-review, or reject.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are responsible for the quality of their reviews and for the quality of the manuscript accepted for publication. The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the quality of the review.

Reviewers are obliged to provide the Editor with an expert assessment of the scientific or professional value of the manuscript within the given deadlines. Reviewers should pay particular attention to the actual contribution and originality of the manuscript. The review must be objective. Reviewers’ judgments must be clear and supported by arguments. Comments that insult the author’s personality or work are considered inappropriate.

Reviewers must not have a conflict of interest with the authors of the manuscript or the research funder. If such a conflict exists, the reviewer is obligated to inform the Editor-in-Chief promptly.

A reviewer who does not consider themselves sufficiently competent in the subject matter of the manuscript should inform the Editor-in-Chief that they are unable to accept the review assignment for that manuscript.

Reviewers should alert the Editor-in-Chief if they have a well-founded suspicion or knowledge of possible violations of ethical standards by the manuscript’s authors.

Reviewers should identify relevant sources that were not considered in the manuscript and may recommend citing specific references. Still, they should not demand citations of works published in the Journal of the Institute of Criminological and Sociological Research or their own work without justification, or if it does not contribute to the quality of the manuscript.

Reviewers should also alert the Editor-in-Chief if they notice significant similarities between the manuscript under consideration and other published works, as well as if they have knowledge that the same manuscript is in the review process in another journal.

Editorial Responsibilities

The Editor-in-Chief of the journal makes the final decision regarding which manuscripts will be published. Decisions are made solely based on the merits of the manuscripts and must be free from racial, gender, religious, ethnic, or political bias. When making publication decisions, the Editor-in-Chief adheres to the editorial policy, taking into account legal regulations on defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

Members of the editorial board, including the Editor-in-Chief, must not have conflicts of interest related to the manuscripts they are reviewing. Members who may be perceived as having a conflict of interest do not participate in the decision-making process for a particular manuscript.

The editorial board ensures that personal data of authors (especially names and affiliations) is removed from the manuscript before sending it for review. The editorial board is obligated to take all reasonable measures to ensure that authors and reviewers remain anonymous during and after the manuscript review process, in accordance with the described procedure.