For reviewers
Review Process and Editorial policy Authors are aware that the peer review process is conducted through the online Editorial Manager® for Proceedings, provided by Sciendo publisher and operated by the organisers' editorial team. Invitations and/or assignments of reviewers are made by the Editorial team and are addressed to all members of the scientific committee, but also to valuable specialists, experts on conference topics, from research and academic education. When reviewers who have accepted an invitation or have been assigned log in to the Editorial Manager® system, they also have access to the button EM Instructions for Reviewers, which enables a Tutorial for Reviewers to facilitate the use of the Editorial Manager® platform. All submitted manuscripts are reviewed for their scientific merit and originality. Afterwards, the reviewers make a recommendation and a scientific evaluation to the editors. Before deciding whether to accept a manuscript, accept it with revisions or reject it, the editor in charge considers both the manuscript and the reviewers' comments. Any communication between editors and reviewers is only possible via the Editorial Manager® system. The reviewers must consider several aspects related to their activities, which serve to ensure a peer review process suitable for the intended purpose, the publication of a conference volume with original contributions and scientific content as Open Access: - The reviewers must evaluate the manuscript according to the reviewer form (all fields of the form "Individual Reviewer Comments" are mandatory) and the deadlines. - All manuscripts received for review must be treated confidentially and must not be shared or discussed with anyone other than the editor. - Reviewers should express their opinions clearly and support them with arguments, without making personal criticisms of the author(s). - If there is a clear suspicion of fraud, the manuscript is rejected. By fraud is meant that the peer reviewer or editorial board finds that parts or all of the text have already been published elsewhere, that there are cases of plagiarism, or that there is suspicion that the data has been falsified. The peer reviews help the managing editor to make decisions based on reviewers' comments, but they can also help the author to improve his or her work. After completing the review form and receiving a decision from the peer reviewers, the managing editor may send the corresponding author one of the following decisions: - Rejected: if there are significant concerns (other than fraud) about the quality of the scientific content of the paper and if the reviewers see no way to improve the article to make it suitable for publication. -Accepted with minor/major revisions: when there are papers that show promise but need further corrections/revisions and rewording. The revised manuscripts will undergo a new peer review process and follow the procedure. - Accepted without changes: if the article is suitable for publication in its current form. |
