Peer Review Policy
The peer review process is fundamental to ensuring the quality, integrity, and scholarly validity of the Bulgarian Numismatic Journal (BNJ). The purpose of peer review is to evaluate submitted manuscripts objectively and ensure that only high-quality, original, and relevant research contributes to the field of numismatics.
- Peer Review Process
2.1 Initial Screening: Upon receiving a manuscript, the editorial team performs an initial assessment to ensure it meets the journal's scope and submission guidelines. Manuscripts that align with the journal's focus proceed to the peer review process.
2.2 Selection of Reviewers: The Editor-in-Chief assigns suitable experts in the field of numismatics as reviewers. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, impartiality, and absence of conflicts of interest with the authors.
2.3 Blind Review: The peer review process is conducted anonymously (double-blind review) to ensure impartiality. Authors' identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, to minimize biases in the evaluation process.
2.4 Review Criteria: Reviewers assess manuscripts based on originality, significance, methodology, clarity of presentation, and adherence to ethical standards. They provide constructive feedback and recommend acceptance, revision, or rejection based on their evaluation.
2.5 Editorial Decision: The Editor-in-Chief considers the reviewers' comments and makes a decision on acceptance, rejection, or revision. Authors receive detailed feedback to help improve their manuscripts if revisions are suggested.
- Reviewer Guidelines
3.1 Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat the manuscript and all related information confidentially and refrain from disclosing any details to third parties.
3.2 Objectivity: Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, providing fair, constructive, and unbiased feedback.
3.3 Timeliness: Reviewers should complete their assessments within the agreed-upon timeframe to ensure timely decisions on manuscripts.
- Author Guidelines
4.1 Quality Submission: Authors are expected to submit original, well-written manuscripts that adhere to the journal's submission guidelines.
4.2 Response to Reviewers' Comments: Authors must address reviewers' comments and suggestions adequately when revising their manuscripts.
4.3 Withdrawal of Submissions: The authors reserve the right to withdraw their submissions in the event of dissatisfaction with the comments and suggestions made.
- Editorial Oversight
5.1 Quality Control: The editorial team oversees the peer review process to maintain its integrity, ensuring that the highest standards of academic publishing are upheld.
5.2 Final Decision: The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to make the final decision on the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript, considering reviewers' recommendations.