Requirements and responsibilities of reviewers

Reviewers are established scientists and researchers. Appointed reviewers have responsibilities and obligations that they fulfill in good faith to ensure that the published articles meet the serial’s criteria. Reviewers approach the review process professionally and adhere to established ethical principles.

The name(s) of the author(s) and their institutional affiliations are anonymized and unknown to the reviewers. Likewise, reviewers adhere to the principles of confidentiality and remain anonymous to the author(s) of the manuscripts. Reviews are available only to the Editorial Board. Reviews are stored exclusively in the archive of the Research Announcements “Heritage BG”.

 Responsibilities and Rights of Reviewers

Reviewers receive an invitation from the Editorial Board. They may accept or decline to review a manuscript according to their competence in the research field. If there is a conflict of interest or a professional or institutional connection to the subject of the manuscript, the reviewer must promptly inform the Editorial Board. Reviewers must thoroughly read the manuscript and complete a review form prepared by the Editorial Board. The evaluation includes the originality of the manuscript and its research value, as well as the relevance and significance of the research, the author(s)’s research creativity, theoretical competence, and research skills.

Reviewers formulate their evaluation based on their expertise and do not allow personal criticism in the reviews. Manuscripts are evaluated solely on the basis of their research value, research results, and intellectual content, regardless of the authors’ ethnicity, national identity, race, gender, political philosophy, sexual orientation, or religious beliefs.

Reviewers fill out the review form according to the criteria. They participate responsibly in the publication process by providing constructive recommendations and advice on spelling, punctuation, and the use of academic style, as well as critical comments, if necessary. The evaluation also contains information on the quality of the illustrative materials provided by the authors of the manuscript. Reviewers provide clear arguments for their evaluations and avoid ambiguous evaluations. They provide recommendations where necessary. When recommending rejection of a manuscript, the reviewer clearly and specifically indicates the errors made and which criteria presented in the review form have not been met. Reviewers evaluate and give an opinion about the correctness of the Cyrillic references’ transliteration according to the instructions for authors, point out any omissions. The reviewer must accurately list main research publications that the author(s) may have overlooked, omitted, or not cited in the manuscript.

The reviewer must inform the Editorial Board of any similarities between the manuscript under review and other publications.