Peer Review Procedure
Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Philologia has adopted the double-blind peer review system. The guest editor(s), together with the journal’s editor(s) in charge of the special-themed issue, first select the submissions according to their relevance to the topic. Submissions passing the initial edi...
| Format: | Article |
|---|---|
| Language: | deu |
| Published: |
Cluj University Press
2023-11-01
|
| Series: | Studia Universitatis Babeş-Bolyai. Philologia |
| Online Access: | http://193.231.18.162:80/index.php/subbphilologia/article/view/6341 |
| Summary: | Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Philologia has adopted the double-blind peer review system. The guest editor(s), together with the journal’s editor(s) in charge of the special-themed issue, first select the submissions according to their relevance to the topic. Submissions passing the initial editorial screening enter the double-blind peer review process. As a rule, this involves the anonymous evaluation of each submission by 2 external referees (from outside both Babeş-Bolyai University and the institution to which the author of the article is affiliated) identified as specialists in the respective academic area.
The review of the submissions is done:
- through elaborate comments on the text, which allow the reviewers to freely and constructively express their suggestions, criticisms, and appreciations.
- by filling the peer-review form that evaluates the following aspects: the clarity of the title and its appropriateness to the content of the manuscript,
• the way in which the abstract captures the content of the manuscript,
• whether the introductory section outlines the relevance of the article for the given field, offers a good overview of previous studies on the same topic, and presents a clearly formulated thesis,
• whether the paper has a solid and well-informed theoretical background, relevant for the analysis/ argumentation,
• the originality of the paper and the significance of its contribution to the field,
• how the concluding section summarizes the results and the consequences/implications,
• the quality and relevance of references,
• appropriate citation and referencing,
• stylistic and grammatical accuracy.
The reviewer’s decision materializes in one of the three possible recommendations, namely: acceptance in the initial form, conditional acceptance (minor/ moderate/ major changes in form, style and/or content), or rejection. In the event of significant discrepancy between the recommendations of the two reviewers, a third specialist is called upon to assist in the final decision of publication or rejection.
|
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1220-0484 2065-9652 |