Journal website - For Reviewers

Peer Review Guidelines

The Journal operates under a double-anonymous peer review model: both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the process. Reviewers receive anonymized manuscripts and must not attempt to identify the authors, ensuring impartial and unbiased assessments. Our reviewers are essential to maintaining the academic quality, rigor, and international relevance of the Journal.

All reviews are managed through the OJS platform. All communications and steps take place within the system.

Before Accepting a Review Invitation

Before agreeing to review a manuscript, please consider:

Expertise: Is the subject within your academic competence?
Availability: Can you complete the review within 4–6 weeks?
Conflicts of Interest: Disclose any personal, professional, institutional, or financial conflicts (e.g. recent collaboration, same department).
Timely Response: Please respond promptly to review invitation.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Confidentiality: Manuscripts are confidential documents. Do not share or discuss content with others without editorial permission.
Objectivity: Provide fair, constructive, and reasoned feedback. Critiques should be respectful and aimed at improving the manuscript.
Ethical Concerns: If you suspect misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, duplicate publication, data falsification), report it confidentially to:

Mate Damić, Associate Editor

✉ mdamic@net.efzg.hr

Subject: “Ethical Concern – [Manuscript ID]”]

Include the manuscript ID and any relevant supporting information.

All concerns are handled confidentially and in line with

Conflict of Interest: Recuse yourself if there is any actual or perceived conflict: financial, institutional, or personal. Notify the editor and decline the review if applicable.

HOW TO BECOME A REVIEWER

We welcome expressions of interest from scholars and professionals whose research interests align with the journal’s scope.

To apply, please send your CV, ORCID ID, and areas of expertise to:

Dario Dunković, Editor
✉ ddunkovic@net.efzg.hr

Evaluation

When reviewing a manuscript, please consider the following key aspects:

Originality and Novelty
Alignment with the Journal’s Scope
Quality of Theoretical and Literature Foundation
Soundness of Methodology and Research Design
Clarity and Depth of Data Analysis and Interpretation
Structure and Clarity of Presentation
Practical and/or Scientific Contribution
Adherence to Ethical Standards

Full evaluation criteria and guidance are provided within the OJS system after a review assignment is accepted. In case of technical or system-related support for the OJS platform, please contact:

Dario Dunković, Editor
✉ ddunkovic@net.efzg.hr

Subject: “OJS support – [Manuscript ID]”]

Confidentiality and Use of Content

Reviewers must not use or share any data, ideas, or information from manuscripts for personal or professional advantage. Any breach is considered serious misconduct.

Use of AI Tools

Reviewers are prohibited from uploading manuscripts or any part of their content to generative AI or third-party tools (e.g. ChatGPT). Any such breach will be classified as misconduct.

Making Your Recommendation

At the end of your review, select one of the following recommendations:

Accept (ready or only minor edits needed)
Minor Revisions (language, formatting, referencing fixes)
Major Revisions (substantial theoretical, methodological, or analytical changes)
Reject (out of scope, flawed, lacks contribution)

Please include a brief summary of your evaluation and clearly structured comments for both the editor and the authors.

Recognition and Contribution

Reviewers play a vital role in the Journal's community. As appreciation:

Certificates of Review are available upon request.
Outstanding reviewers may be recognized annually on the Journal website.
Dedicated reviewers may be invited to join the Editorial Team.

Commitment to Diversity and Inclusion

We encourage participation from reviewers of all backgrounds, geographic regions, and career stages, reflecting our commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion in scholarly publishing.

Open Science

In line with our commitment to transparency, we offer reviewers the option, by mutual agreement:

to have their comments published alongside accepted articles.
Comments can be published anonymously or with reviewer attribution, depending on the reviewer’s preference.
If reviewer would like comments to be published, we appreciate to indicate preference in the “Comments to the Editor” section during your review.

This promotes openness and accountability in scholarly communication.