- formulation and clarity of the topic and declared aim of research;
- relevance of the topic;
- novelty, originality of the topic/research;
- research method application and appropriateness;
- critical review of the topic’s investigation;
- suitability of the analysis of scholarly research data;
- relevant and argument-backed dicussion (data analysis);
- substantiated conclusions and generalisations, based on arguments outlined in the text;
- well thought-out and logically coherent structure of the work;
- writing style, legitimacy and correctness of professional language and use of terminology;
- compliance with the journal’s procedure for citations, providing references and compilation of a list of literature used.
The journal seeks to provide authors with clear feedback that would help them in improving the quality of their work. As such, the journal asks (yet does not demand) that reviewers submit their reviews on the review form sent to them, or write their reviews in a free form format. Specific critical comments or recommendations should clearly relate to specific elements of the article. Reviews can and should be critical, however, we ask reviewers to keep in mind that disrespectful language or criticism ad hominem may be considered as a reflection of the assessor’s subjectivity.