The rules of reviewing of the papers for INRR

1. All papers submitted are initially evaluated by members of editorial board. Editorial board reserves on this stage the possibility to reject the text or to return it with demand for amendments or changes. Initially accepted papers are passed to the reviewers competent in the field. The editorial board informs the author that his paper is passed for review, or is rejected. In exceptional and well-founded cases, editorial board may decide to accept the paper without review. This applies to the cases of papers published previously, that were independently reviewed before, and to the cases of transcripts of editorial debates, interviews, and letters to the publisher.
2. The academic papers and essays are passed to two independent reviewers; one of them should be the competent in the field employee of Institute of National Remembrance, the other not employed by the IPN, and not the member of the Academic Board of the INRR. Editorial board will seek to appoint the reviewers not connected to the author of the paper with any relationship that could impact the reliability and impartiality of review, and to avoid the eventual conflict of interests between reviewers and author.
3. Editorial board may appoint only one reviewer for the evaluation of the recent publications’ overviews.
4. Reviewers are required to have at least a doctoral degree; in cases of documented expertise in the field, the review may be accepted exceptionally from person with the M.A., B.A. or equivalent title.
5. Reviewers are oblidged not to use the knowledge of reviewed text prior to it’s publication.
6. Editorial board follows the policy of the double blind peer-review.
7. Reviews are confidential, i.e. the access for the contents of reviews is granted to the members of the editorial board and authors of the papers only.
8. Reviews must be written (according to the form) and concluded with recommendation for acceptance of paper, proposed changes or additions, or its rejection.
9. Editorial board is entitled to reject the review or return it with request for the amendments, if the review apparently does not meet the proper basic and/or formal requirements, especially the cases of evaluations perfunctory, curt, containing unfounded criticisms or appraisals, logically incoherent (i.e. when evaluation does not meet the final recommendation).
10. In cases of contradictory reviews, the editorial board is entitled to appoint the third reviewer.
11. Reviews received, editorial board decides about publication of the paper or it’s rejection. For the publication of paper there are two positive reviews required; for the publication of the book overview only one positive review is required. Editorial board reserves the entitlement for demand of amendments, changes, additions etc. pointed by reviewers or by itself; the decision concerning publication of reviewed paper depends on complying by the author with changes or amendments proposed. The editorial boards reserves the right to decide on final publication or rejection of the text basing on the reviews’ conclusions and board’s own evaluation of the paper’s academic value, as well as paper’s cohesion with the issue’s theme.
12. Reviewed and accepted text will be edited and adjusted, then translated and proofred.
13. List of reviewers will be published in every issue of the periodical and online.

Formularz recenzji

Review Form