Submissions

Author Guidelines

The section ‘Essays’ mostly includes monographic articles. Conference papers that are esteemed of relevance and interest to the chosen topic are also published.

Submissions that do not match the monographic topic chosen for one issue's “Essays” are in the “Misc Articles“ section. Proposals undergo the same double blind peer-review process as “Essays”; this takes place under the supervison of journal editors instead of guest editors.

Short articles, comments, introductory remarks, preliminary results that author(s) want to share with the scientific community should be submitted to this “Notes” section. An open peer-review process is used.

The section ‘Documents and text’ hosts translations, comments or critical editions of unpublished or rare texts. Since content is not original, an open peer review takes place. Content in this section is sometimes invited.

The ‘News‘ section addresses seminars, meetings, and congresses. Accounts of national or international projects and academic news at large – within the scope of the journal – are also published in this section. This articles are reviewd by journal editors.

Book reviews. These can be invited, based on journal editor's interest list, or just submitted to journal’s attention. This is an Open Access section with an open review policy.

Peer review process

Submissions to any double-blind peer-reviewed section are anonymized by an editorial team member. The journal editors in chief or the guest editor(s) make a preliminary assessment of the submission and either desk-reject it or forward it to at least two external, independent reviewers. This process takes usually six months.

Submissions to open review sections are preliminarily assessed by the section editor, then reviewed by the section editor and an external reviewer.

The journal uses a double-blind peer review process. Proposed texts are received by the Editorial Board, which decides whether to reject the proposal ex officio (in the case of a focus incompatible with the journal's scientific objectives, or in the case of obvious misconduct, including conflict of interest, plagiarism and self-plagiarism) or to initiate the review process. In the latter case, the Editorial Board will be assisted by the Editorial Office in managing the anonymous review process, including identifying the two reviewers, mediating between reviewers and authors, and protecting their identities in the final decision. In the event of a major disagreement between the two reviewers, the management may reserve the right to request a new opinion and initiate a second review cycle. The protection of the identities of those involved in the blind review process is ensured by the Open Journal System platform used by the editors for the editorial production process and the publication of issues. Reviewers are required to justify their judgement by completing the review form on the journal's OJS platform.