Peer Review

This journal follows a double blind peer review process and the decision to publish depends on the favourable opinion of two reviewers.

The journal uses a two‑round evaluation process. In the second round, the reviewers’ decision is final/binding. This means that this stage serves exclusively to verify whether the revisions requested in the first round have been fully addressed. If aspects requiring additional significant changes persist, the submission will be rejected.

The reviewers are asked to fill in the assessment matrices. The list of reviewers is updated every three years and is made public.

Transparency indicators are published and regularly updated here.