Reviewers' responsibilities

Reviewers are obligated to provide a qualified and timely assessment of the scholarly merits of the manuscript. The reviewer pays particular attention to the genuine contribution and originality of the manuscript. The review process must be completely objective, and the judgments made by the reviewers should be clear and supported by arguments.

During the review process, reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on its alignment with the journal's scope, the relevance of the investigated topic and employed methods, the scientific significance of the information presented, and the quality of the presentation and scholarly references. The review follows a standardized format.

Reviewers are required to declare any potential conflicts of interest with the authors or funders of the research. If such conflicts exist, the reviewer must promptly inform the Editor-in-Chief. Reviewers should not accept papers for review that fall outside their area of expertise.

If reviewers have well-founded suspicions or knowledge of possible ethical violations by the authors, they should bring this to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief.

Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been considered in the manuscript. They may suggest specific references for citation, but they should not demand the inclusion of papers published in the same journal or their own papers, unless it is justified.

Reviewers are expected to enhance the quality of the manuscript through their suggestions. If they recommend corrections before publication, they should specify how these improvements can be achieved.

Confidentiality must be maintained for all manuscripts received for review. Reviewers must not use unpublished materials disclosed in the submitted manuscripts without the express written consent of the authors.