Principles of reviewing publications in the quarterly “Marketing of Scientific and Research Organizations”

  1. Each publication is assessed by at least two independent reviewers who are not employees of the Editorial Office and from outside of the research unit affiliated by the author of the publication.
  2. The authors and reviewers do not know each other’s identities (the so-called double-blind review process).In other solutions, the reviewer must sign a declaration of no conflict of interest; the following relations are considered to be the conflict of interest between the reviewer and the author:
    1. direct personal relationships (kinship, legal relationships, conflict),
    2. relations of professional subordination,
    3. direct scientific cooperation in the last two years preceding the preparation of the review.
  3. The review is in writing and ends with an unambiguous conclusion as to whether the article should be published or rejected. On this basis, the Editorial Office decides whether to accept the article for publication or to reject it.
  4. The rules of qualifying the publication as well as the review form are made public. The criteria for qualifying or rejecting the text are as follows: originality of the subject matter, substantive value of the text, quality of own research (if applicable), literature sources used. The review form and formal requirements for authors are available on the journal’s website (
  5. The names of the reviewers of particular publications / issues are not disclosed; once a year, a list of cooperating reviewers is published on the journal’s website.
  6. The ordered reviews are the property of the Editorial Office of the quarterly “Marketing of Scientific and Research Organizations”.

For download: