Informacje dla autorów

Czy jesteś zainteresowany wysłaniem zgłoszenia do tego czasopisma? Polecamy, abyś zapoznał się z O czasopiśmie zasadami obowiązującymi w tym czasopiśmie, a także ze wskazówkami dla autora. Autorzy muszą zarejestrować się do czasopisma zanim wyślą zgłoszenie lub zalogować się i rozpocząć pięciostopniowy proces.

INFORMATION FOR AUTHORS

Texts complying with the Journal's profile but not meeting the editorial standards will (at the submission stage) be returned to the Author for correction. Please read the following: general rules for the acceptance and publication of texts; editorial requirements; contents of the submission; stages of article circulation in the OJS Optimum system; reviewing rules.

Note: At the article submission stage, i.e. when entering metadata, please add all Authors: names, email addresses, and affiliations.

 

GENERAL RULES FOR THE ACCEPTANCE AND PUBLICATION OF ARTICLES:

The editors accept only original texts written in Polish or English. The texts may take the form of scientific articles, research reports, reviews, information about conferences, symposia and scientific seminars.

Articles should be submitted electronically via the OJS submission form. A scan of the signed documents: licence agreement, and author's statement should be sent along with the text.

Texts sent to the Editor should have clearly distinguishable components (introduction, chapters, possible subchapters, summary, literature). They should be accompanied in English by an abstract (including: purpose, research method, results, originality/value), keywords, and JEL classification codes.

The front page of the article should state:

  • job title,
  • author's name,
  • name of the organisational unit represented by the author (faculty, university),
  • ORCID number of the author (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) written as follows: ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6499-8242,
  • e-mail address of the correspondent author.

With regard to the current standards on the procedure for safeguarding the originality of publications (the so-called ghostwriting barrage) introduced by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education for scientific journals, authors of articles are required to:

- to disclose the contribution of individual authors to the publication (stating their affiliation and contributions, i.e., who authored the concepts, assumptions, methods, protocol, etc. used in the preparation of the publication);

- to provide information on the sources of funding for publications, contributions from scientific research institutions, associations and other bodies (financial disclosure).

To qualify a text for publication, it is necessary to obtain positive opinions from 2 reviewers. All articles published in WSES Scientific Journals are reviewed by at least two independent reviewers.

 

Reviewing

RULES ON REVIEWING PUBLICATIONS in the WSES Research Notebooks

  1. The Editorial Committee assesses the article in terms of form and content. The initial internal assessment involves checking the compliance of the scientific paper with the formal requirements made available to authors on the editorial page. At this stage, the article is qualified for the external evaluation stage or is rejected. Reasons for rejection may include: inappropriateness of the subject matter to the profile of the journal, poor quality of the text, lack of originality, and poor quality of the bibliography. The qualification of an article involves the appointment of a thematic editor who has relevant knowledge and skills in a specific research area.
  2. At least two independent reviewers from outside the scientific unit affiliated with the author of the publication shall be appointed to evaluate each publication. Reviewers are selected in several ways:

- searching bibliographic and bibliometric databases,

- use of the Reviewer Selection Support System (https://recenzenci.opi.org.pl/sssr-web/site/home),

- to be selected from among the members of the Scientific Council.

  1. authors and reviewers do not know each other's identities (the so-called double-blind review process).
  2. The review shall be in writing and shall conclude with a clear conclusion as to whether the article is accepted for publication or not.
  3. The criteria for qualifying or rejecting a publication are available in the appendix review form.
  4. The statistical editor checks the correctness of the statistical methods used by the authors.
  5. The list of reviewers evaluating articles in a given year is published on the website. The names of reviewers for individual publications or journal issue numbers are not disclosed.
  6. The editors emphasise "ghostwriting" (when someone has made a significant contribution to a publication without disclosing his or her participation as one of the authors or without mentioning his or her role in the publication) and "guest authorship" (when an author's contribution is negligible or non-existent but he or she is nevertheless an author/co-author of the publication) is considered a sign of scientific dishonesty, and any cases detected will be exposed.

Studies accepted for publication are subject to scientific editing and linguistic and technical correction. The editors reserve the right to make changes to titles and abbreviations, and editorial corrections in accordance with the standards of the journal.

FEES:

There is no charge for publication in the journal WSES Scientific Journals.

EDITORIAL REQUIREMENTS:

The title and abstract should be given in Polish and English.

The text should be formatted according to the publisher's template, in a word processor compatible with Microsoft Word. It should have clearly defined sections: introduction, chapters - subchapters if any, summary, and literature.

The abstract should have clearly distinguishable sections (in separate paragraphs): Purpose; Research Method; Conclusions; Originality/Value/Implications/Recommendations.

A minimum of 3 keywords should include relevant terms from the title and abstract (avoid general terms, plural terms and multi-word terms; avoid 'and', 'of'). Specific keywords can be found in Google Trends and Google AdWords.

JEL classification codes are available at: https://www.aeaweb.org/jel/guide/jel.php

Tables and figures should be prepared according to the guidelines in the publishing template, to be included at the stage of submission of the article to the editor.

Only works cited by the Author should be included in the literature list.

The bibliography should be written in alphabetical order.

 

CONTENT OF THE APPLICATION:

The article submission should have files:

FILE 1. Author's data / FILE 1. Author's_details

FILE 2. Text of the article / FILE 2. The main text of the article.doc

FIGURE 3. Figures and tables (Excel file with all tables, and charts - mandatory if present in the text of the article; prepared in grey tones)

 

STAGES of article circulation in the OJS system:

Submission of an article to journal via OJS - Author fills in metadata, uploads files: File 1. Author/Authors data, source of publication funding, authors' contribution to the publication, the title of the article; File 2. Article text without Author/Authors data; File 3. Excel files with all tables, and graphs (mandatory if present in the article text; prepared in greyscale); License agreement; Statement.

The Editorial Secretary verifies that the article complies with the journal profile and that it has been correctly submitted (i.e. that all elements have been correctly and completely uploaded to the system). In cases of non-compliance of the article content with the journal profile - the article is rejected; missing files (i.e. File 1, File 2, File 3, License Agreement, Author Statement), missing files (i.e. Author's failure to comply with the formal requirements of the journal) - the article is sent back to the Author for correction. The time for corrections is 7 days.

An article complying with the journal's requirements is referred to the editor-in-chief.

The editor-in-chief decides whether to proceed or reject the article without review. In the event of a positive review, he/she delegates the supervision of the article's circulation to the subject editor.

The subject editor selects two substantive Reviewers and a Statistical Reviewer (if the content of the article requires it).

Reviewers and the Statistical Editor have 7 days to agree or refuse a review; 14 days to produce a review.

Note: The review stage is prolonged in case of disagreements with the Reviewers, or delays in completing the review.

The subject editor has 14 days to review the content of the review. The reviewers' assessments determine whether the article is accepted or rejected. In the event of one negative review, the article is rejected. Note: In justified cases, the article may be sent for a third review - when the two previous reviews contained extreme marks. The decision to refer the article to the third reviewer is taken by the thematic editor in consultation with the editor-in-chief/publishing college

The editor notifies the Author of the decision. In the event of a positive assessment, he sends the Author the contents of the review and the recommendations and comments of the reviewers and his own/the Editor-in-Chief's/publishing college.

The author submits the revised article (File 2) with a response to the review within 7 days of receiving the review results. Attaches again files with editable data, and graphs (File 3).

The subject editor reads the revised text. Within 14 days, he/she notifies the Author of the decision to accept the article or makes any comments and recommendations.

An article accepted by the Subject Editor is submitted for linguistic correction and typesetting. At the stage of preparing the article for print, the Editor-in-Chief/Topical Editor may make additional comments and suggestions for changes.

 

Reviewing:

Two independent substantive Reviewers from outside the scientific unit affiliated with the Author of the publication are appointed to evaluate each publication. Reviewers are selected in several ways: by searching bibliographic and bibliometric databases; using the Reviewer Selection Support System (https://recenzenci.opi.org.pl/sssr-web/site/home); selecting from among members of the Scientific Council.

The validity check of the statistical methods is carried out by the Statistical Editor.

Authors and Reviewers do not know each other's identities (the so-called double-blind review process). In other cases, the Reviewer signs a declaration of no conflict of interest.

The review is in writing and concludes with a clear conclusion as to whether the article should be accepted for publication or rejected.

The criteria for qualifying n or rejecting a publication are available in the appendix review form.

Positive substantive and statistical reviews are a prerequisite for the publication of an article. In justified cases, the article may be referred for a third review, i.e. when the two previous reviews contained extreme evaluations

The list of reviewers assessing articles in a given year is published on the website.

The names of reviewers of individual publications or issues of the journal are not disclosed.