Reviewers

1. prof. Grażyna Szczygieł (Uniwersytet w Białymstoku)

2. prof. Barbara Stańdo-Kawecka (Uniwersytet Jagielloński)

3. prof. Stefan Lelental (Uniwersytet Łódzki)

4. prof. Wojciech Zalewski (Uniwersytet Gdański)

5. prof. Grzegorz Wiciński (Uniwersytet Łódzki)

6. prof. Jerzy Lachowski (Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika w Toruniu)

7. prof. Andrzej Bisztyga (Uniwersytet Zielonogórski)

8. prof. Tadeusz Dmochowski (Uniwersytet Gdański)

9. prof. Andrzej Korybski (Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej w Lublinie)

 

 

Review procedure:


1. The article review procedure conforms to the recommendations of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education.
2. All articles undergo preliminary evaluation by the Editorial Board. If an article is in line with the journal’s profile and fulfils the requirements listed in the “Information for Authors”, it passes to the next stage of the procedure.
3. The Editorial Board selects Reviewers from among experts specialising in the topic in question.
4. The selected Reviewers must guarantee independence as well as a lack of conflict of interests with the Authors (no direct personal relationship, professional subordination and direct scholarly collaboration over the last two years preceding the writing of the review).
5. Each review is written in a form prepared by the Editorial Board. The review must end with an unequivocal conclusion as to whether the article should be accepted for publication or rejected.
6. After receiving the review, the Editorial Board decides whether to publish the article or reject it. The Editorial Board reserves the right to propose, on the basis of the Board’s or the Reviewers’ opinions, corrections on which will depend the final decision concerning publication.
7. After the final acceptance for publication, the article will be proofread and copy edited.
8. Once a year the Editorial Board publishes (in the journal or on the website) a list of Reviewers collaborating with the publisher.
9. The information about the Reviewer of is confidential. It can be declassified only in the case of a negative review or an article containing controversial elements, following the Author’s request, if the Reviewer in question agrees to reveal this information.

 

 

                                                                              REVIEW FORM

for an article to be published in Nowa Kodyfikacja Prawa Karnego (New Codification of Criminal Law)

 

Article title:

................................................................................................................................................................................................

................................................................................................................................................................................................

Please write your review, taking into account, in particular, the criteria indicated below, marking your choice.

 

 

Evaluation criteria:

No (no additions possible)

Requires corrections or additions

 

Yes

 

Is the subject tackled in the article relevant enough in cognitive terms?

 

 

 

 

Is the article original in comparison with existing publications?

 

 

 

Does the article bring anything new to the literature on the subject or

opens up new research perspectives?

 

 

 

Is the author’s selection of literature correct in substantive terms and does it include the most recent publications?

 

 

 

 

Is the literature correctly cited?

 

 

 

Are the methods used by the author appropriate to the subject matter?

 

 

 

Is the content presented in a clear and

logical manner?

 

 

 

Is the article linguistically correct (adequate terminology, clarity for the reader, quality of the language)?

 

 

 

Does the title match the content?

 

 

 

Is the article scholarly in nature?

 

 

 

 

In a separate annex (page two of the form) please present any detailed remarks you might have in connection with your assessment as well as suggested changes.

 

The article I have reviewed (please mark the right opinion):

 

is suitable for publication

is suitable for publication after the Reviewer’s remarks have been taken into account

 

is not suitable for publication

 

 

 

 

The information about the Reviewer is confidential. It can be declassified only in the case of a negative review or an article containing controversial elements, following the Author’s request, if the Reviewer in question agrees to reveal this information. Please find attached to the review form a description of the review procedure for Nowa Kodyfikacja Prawa Karnego.

 

Reviewer’s name and surname ………………………………………………………………………………………………

Reviewer’s affiliation …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

                                                                          Review date…………………………………………

                                                                          Reviewer’s signature……………………………

 

 

 

 

zamknij

Twoj koszyk (produkty: 0)

Brak produktów w koszyku

Twój koszyk Do kasy