All the materials sent will be considered in the first instance by Chief Editor of Materiały i Sprawozdania Rzeszowskiego Ośrodka Archeologicznego. In case of the positive opinion, they are further sent for review to the reviewer or reviewers.

The journal is reviewed by external reviewers.

The materials sent for publication are submitted to the reviewers for reviewing provided that: (a) they have never been published by other publishing houses before, (b) they have not been given for consideration to other editorial boards and (c) the institution where the author (or authors) works has approved the fact of their publication in Materiały i Sprawozdania Rzeszowskiego Ośrodka Archeologicznego.

The articles published in our annual represent the opinions of their author or authors and one should not think that they were written in such a manner as to reflect the opinion of the editorial board or publisher.

Reviewing principles:

  1. The editorial board of Materiały i Sprawozdania Rzeszowskiego Ośrodka Archeologicznego ensures an appropriate substantive level of the texts, an appropriate selection and quality of figures.
  2. The articles sent to the editorial board of Materiały i Sprawozdania Rzeszowskiego Ośrodka Archeologicznego are pre-assessed and qualified in order to verify if they are compliant with the journal profile and requirements set out in Information for authors. If the articles are not compliant with the profile or do not meet the requirements set out in the instructions for authors, they are returned to the authors with an appropriate letter of explanation
  3. All the published articles are reviewed anonymously according to the double-blind review process model (the reviewer does not know the author’s identity, while the author does not receive any information about the reviewer.)
  4. The assessment is made with the use of the review form.
  5. Each publication is assessed by two independent external reviewers from outside the scientific unit affiliated by the publication’s author. The reviewers’ names are published on the editorial page of each volume and on the journal website.
  6. Each review ends with a clear conclusion that the article is approved for printing (in its current form or after changes) or rejected.
  7. The authors of the articles are obliged to take the reviewers’ comments into account or justify the non-acceptance of the comments. In the case of divergent reviews of the reviewers, the article may be submitted for publication provided that it has received a positive opinion of the third reviewer. If the text has received negative opinions twice, the editorial board rejects the possibility of the article publication.

The reviewers are chosen by the Editorial Board among Polish and Central European scientists specialising in the topic of the article under review.

Skip to content