Reviewing & publishing procedure

Reviewing & publishing procedure

Article and book manuscripts submitted to Research and Publishing Institute for Security and Defence Studies at WSBPI “Apeiron” undergo the following reviewing process:


Step 1: Editorial assessment

The Publishing Team verify whether the manuscript meets formal requirements (in case of articles, the requirements are established separately for each journal, see for: SD, KB, SEL; in case of books – standard editorial requirements apply) and makes the initial assessment of whether the topic matches the journal’s profile (see for: SD, KB, SEL) or, in case of a book manuscript, if it fulfils the research criteria of its discipline. Also, manuscripts undergo plagiarism check at this stage, by means of software (further anti-plagiarism tools are soon to be obtained). Depending on the result of the check, relevant steps are taken, in which we do our best to comply with COPE-recommended procedures.


Step 2: Peer review

a)     in case of articles – double blind peer review

After the article manuscript is accepted in Step 1, the Publishing Team delete author’s data from the manuscript for the sake of anonymity and forward it to two reviewers belonging to the Board of Reviewers of the journal in question (see for: SD, KB, SEL). The reviewers then parallelly review the manuscript by filling in the review form. The reviewers must not be affiliated in the author’s institution. Double-blind review standard is applied: the author and the reviewers do not know one another’s identity and the list of particular manuscripts’ reviewers is never published.

b)     in case of monographs – double open peer review

After the monograph is accepted in Step 1, the Publishing Team forward it to two reviewers that are competent in the field. The reviewers then parallelly review the manuscript in a descriptive manner, based on questions from the monograph reviewing form. The reviewers must not be affiliated in the author’s institution. Double-open review standard is applied: the author and the reviewers know one another’s identity and the list of a monograph’s reviewers is published on the book’s editorial page.

Important: Conference proceedings, which consist of papers submitted by different authors, are a special case. For the best works to be selected, each submitted manuscript undergoes double blind review, as in the case of articles. On the basis of the reviews, the Institute’s publishing team chooses the works that are included in the proceedings. Having been compiled in this way, a book may then undergo a further double-open review as a whole, depending on the decision of the volume’ scientific editors.


Step 3: Acceptance, rejection or counselling

After reviewers submit their recommendations on the forms, an assessment is made whether to accept the manuscript. Two positive reviews mean acceptance and two negative ones – rejection. When one positive and one negative review is submitted, the manuscript is sent to the third reviewer. In particularly difficult cases, e.g. when two very contradictory reviews are submitted, a competent member of the Institute’s Editorial Board is consulted for expert advice.


Step 4: Final editorial works

Authors who publish their work in the Institute are obliged to sign the exclusive licence agreement (available here). The agreement states that the author gives to the publisher an exclusive licence for the exploitation of the work; it also states that the author(s) confirm(s) the originality of the work and their own contribution to it. The agreement also contains a statement that no ghostwriting nor guest authorship took place in the process of the creation of the work. If the work has more than one author, the authors also submit an author contribution form (available here), in which they state the percentage of their contribution to the creation of the work.

The manuscripts of books and articles which are accepted in the reviewing process then undergo editing and proofreading which are done by the executive editor in cooperation with the Publishing Team and with the author. In case the terminology or the content of the work are so specialist that certain editorial works go beyond the competences of the Publishing Team, they ask an expert for advice – in case of an article, it is a competent Subject Editors team member of a given journal (see for: SD, KB, SEL), and in case of a book – a competent member of the Institute’s Editorial Board. The executive editor is responsible for contacting the author so as to forward reviewers’ remarks and suggest possible alterations and corrections. After editing and proofreading, the manuscript is sent back to the author so that they could perform the final  “author’s proofreading”. The duration of the proofreading is agreed upon individually in each case, as it depends on the volume of the manuscript and the number of alterations and reviewers’ remarks. After the “author’s proofreading” the author sends the manuscript back to the executive editor. The executive editor acknowledges the author’s suggestions and presents the final version of the manuscript. When the author accepts it, the typesetting of the manuscript may commence.