Review Process
How the review process works:
The submitted contribution will first be assessed by the editor-in-chief or an authorized person, who has the right to reject the contribution in case of serious deficiencies. If the paper is not rejected, the editor-in-chief will postpone it for peer-review process. Peer review is a process whereby an expert in the field provides advice and suggestions on the manuscript. The peer-review process is anonymous and the Axis Mundi editorial staff will not reveal the identity of the peer reviewer to the author. Likewise, the peer reviewer will not learn the identity of the author. This avoids any potential conflicts of interest arising during the peer-review process.
Each reviewer will make an opinion according to a standardized form.
On the basis of comments from reviewers the Editor-in-Chief decide whether the manuscript has been accepted, requires minor or major revisions, or has been rejected.
After a possible revision of the paper, the editor-in-chief decides whether the author's modifications are sufficient for publication or whether it is necessary to prepare further reviews.
The final decision on accepting or rejecting the paper is up to the editor-in-chief of the journal.
Peer-review form
Reviewed text:
Reviewer (surname, first name, title):
How do you rate the text in terms of the following criteria (mark one option at a time)
1. Does the text meet the requirements for scientific work?
a) yes
b) contains minor deficiencies
c) contains major deficiencies
d) does not
2. Is the objective of the text clearly defined?
a) yes
b) no
c) is disputed
3. The originality of the selected topic and its processing is:
The topic is original
a) the author formulates an original topic
b) the topic is treated in an original way
The topic is not original
c) the text is beneficial in mapping the current topic
d) there is no obvious contribution of the authors to the topic
4. Processing methods are:
a) new
b) routine
c) inappropriate
5. The structure of the contribution is:
a) appropriate
b) requires minor modification
c) requires major modification
d) unsuitable
6. The title of the paper is:
a) concise
b) requires minor modification
c) requires major modification
d) inadequate
7. Use of relevant literature:
a) the most recent relevant literature is used
b) some important generally accessible work related to the problem has not been used
c) the relevant literature is largely not used
8. The language and stylistic level is:
a) very good
b) sufficient
c) insufficient
9. Literature is cited:
a) correctly
b) requires modification
c) incorrect
10. Abstract is:
a) concise
b) requires minor modification
c) requires major modification
d) inadequate
11. Keywords are:
a) concise
b) requires minor modification
c) requires major modification
d) inadequate
12. The level of the graphic attachments is:
a) appropriate
b) requires minor modification
c) requires major modification
d) inadequate
Overall assessment of the reviewed text:
a) I recommend publishing
b) I recommend publishing with minor modifications
c) I recommend publishing only after substantial modifications
d) I do not recommend publishing
Commentary (optional):
Fees:
Journal Axis Mundi does not charge any submission or article processing fees.