Peer Review Process

To ensure the highest scientific quality and objectivity of our publications, all manuscripts submitted to "Analecta. Studia i Materiały z Dziejów Nauki" undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process. Below is a detailed outline of this process:

1. Initial Editorial Assessment Upon receiving a manuscript, the Editorial Board conducts an initial verification to check for alignment with the journal's thematic profile, completeness of required elements (e.g., abstract, keywords, bibliography), and adherence to basic formal and ethical requirements. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage.
2. Manuscript Anonymization If the initial assessment is positive, the manuscript is anonymized. All information that could identify the author(s) (e.g., author's name, affiliation, acknowledgments, self-citations that could reveal identity) is removed from the text. This ensures complete impartiality of the evaluation.
3. Reviewer Selection The Editor-in-Chief or a thematic editor selects at least two independent reviewers from among experts in the relevant field. Reviewers are chosen to avoid any conflict of interest. A crucial aspect of the double-blind system is that reviewers do not know the identity of the author(s) of the manuscript, and the author(s) do not know the identity of the reviewers.
4. Review Process The anonymized manuscript is sent to the selected reviewers along with a review form and guidelines. Reviewers assess the work based on: Originality and contribution to knowledge, Research methodology and correctness of applied tools, Clarity and coherence of argumentation, Accuracy of conclusions, Language correctness and style, Timeliness and completeness of the bibliography, Reviewers prepare detailed opinions, including recommendations regarding publication (acceptance without changes, acceptance with minor revisions, acceptance with major revisions, rejection).
5. Editorial Decision Upon receiving feedback from both reviewers, the Editorial Board analyzes their recommendations. An final decision regarding the manuscript's publication is then made based on these analyses. Possible decisions include: Acceptance: The manuscript is accepted for publication.Acceptance with revisions (minor/major): The manuscript requires the suggested revisions. Authors receive anonymized reviews and are given a specified time to revise the text. The revised version may be sent back to the reviewers if the changes are substantial.Rejection: The manuscript does not meet the journal's scientific standards or requires too many revisions to be published.
6. Feedback to the Author The author(s) receive notification of the Editorial Board's decision along with the anonymized reviews. If revisions are required, authors are asked to implement them and submit the revised version along with a letter addressing each of the reviewers' comments.