Peer Review Process

1. Principles of Academic Integrity

The editorial board of "Historia i Polityka" firmly opposes all forms of academic dishonesty. The journal has implemented and consistently applies procedures to prevent “ghostwriting” (concealed authorship) and “guest authorship” (attributing authorship to uninvolved persons), as well as actions related to detecting, preventing, and reporting plagiarism. Every text is checked with the CrossCheck anti-plagiarism system.

2. Stages of Peer Review

• Submission: By submitting an article, the author(s) consent to its review.
• Initial Evaluation: The text is assessed formally and substantively by subject editors.
• Review: Reviews, discussions, sources, and surveys are evaluated by members of the editorial board.
• Anonymity: The review process for academic articles uses the “double-blind review” method – reviewers do not know the identity of the author, and the author does not know the reviewers.
• Reviewers: Each academic article is evaluated by two external experts (from outside the research institution affiliated with the author), each holding at least a doctorate.
• No Conflict of Interest: There must be no conflict of interest between reviewers and authors (up to second-degree kinship, marital relationship, professional relationships, or scientific collaboration within the last two years).
• Confidentiality: Reviewers may not use any knowledge of the manuscript before publication.
• Review Outcome: The review must contain a clear recommendation for acceptance or rejection of the article. The author is informed of the review outcome via the review form.
• Revisions: The author makes corrections according to the reviewer’s recommendations, and the reviewer re-examines the revised text.

3. Criteria for Rejection

• The article contains too high a percentage of borrowed material.
• It lacks originality or has already been published in whole (or in large sections) in another journal.
• The author has not used the latest literature and sources.
• There are serious methodological errors.

4. Criteria for Acceptance

• The reviewers clearly agree to the publication of the text.
• The author has addressed all comments from the reviewers and editors regarding the article’s content.