Anonymous review procedure

The purpose of anonymous peer reviewing by experts in a field is to assist the editors in making publication decisions, but it also helps the author(s) to improve their manuscript.

Double anonymous peer review is an important stage in the publication of manuscripts in the journal Contrastive Linguistics, as it ensures that the published texts meet the highest quality requirements of scientific publications in the relevant field.

Book reviews, notes, scientific reports, bibliographies, letters and other types of manuscripts that are not scientific articles are not subject to double anonymous peer reviewing.

The double-blind review rule also applies in cases of thematic issues or supplements, including in cases where a guest-editor is responsible for an issue.

An editor of the journal Contrastive Linguistics performs a technical check immediately after the submission of a manuscript in the OJS Manuscript Management and Publishing System to see if the requirements for anonymity have been met. If they have been violated, the author is informed and required to submit an anonymized version of their text to the management and publishing system.

After the submitted manuscript has been checked for anonymity and has undergone an antiplagiarism check, an appropriate editor is notified to recommend at least two anonymous reviewers who are experts in the field of the submitted manuscript.

When choosing anonymous reviewers, the Editorial Board is guided by the following principles:

·        The reviewer is a specialist in the field in which the manuscript is submitted.

·        The reviewer has no conflict of interest with the author(s).

·        The reviewer has not been a co-author with any of the authors of a submitted manuscript in the preceding three years.

·        The reviewer does not work at the same institution as the author(s).

·        The reviewer has the educational and scientific degree "doctor".

Reviewers are invited to anonymously review a manuscript. The reviewers are free to accept or reject the said invitation, indicating their reasons for doing so.

Any selected reviewer who does not feel qualified to evaluate the research presented in a manuscript or suspects that they will not be able to submit the review on time should notify the editor immediately so that another reviewer can be selected.

Reviewers should refuse to review manuscripts in which there are grounds for a conflict of interest, for example, co-authorship, personal competition, or other type of affiliation with the authors or other natural and legal persons directly related to the manuscript.

If a reviewer accepts to prepare an anonymous review, they have the obligation within a month to prepare the review and submit it through the manuscript management and publication system. The reviewer may request an extension of the review period, if necessary, for valid reasons.

All selected reviewers are required to strictly comply with the review requirements disclosed in the reviewer card and to ensure the completeness and systematicity of the submitted review.

For reviewing purposes, each manuscript is treated as confidential. Reviewers are not permitted to discuss the manuscripts they are evaluating except as expressly instructed by the editor and with authorized persons.

The review process is free of bias, personal preferences, or prejudices. Personal criticism directed at the author(s) of a manuscript is not accepted.

The review assesses the conceptual, linguistic, and structural qualities of the manuscript submitted for anonymous review.

Claims by the reviewer that an argument or conclusion has been previously published must be supported by appropriate citations. Reviewers are required to find publications directly relevant to the topic that have not been cited by the author. The reviewer should bring to the editor’s attention any significant similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under review and any other publication with which they are personally familiar.

Privileged information or ideas obtained as a result of reviewing manuscripts are treated as confidential and cannot be used for personal gains by the reviewers.

Reviewers do not have the right to demand the citation of their own papers unless there is a strictly scientific reason for doing so. Reviewers must refrain from abusive, hostile, or defamatory language.

Anonymous reviews are submitted to the OJS Manuscript Management and Publishing System. Before the Editorial Board decides to publish a manuscript, the authors are made aware of the anonymous reviews and are asked to make corrections that are suggested in the anonymous reviews. If the author(s) disagrees with the reviewers’ notes and recommendations, they can request a third anonymous review or retract their text.

Based on the two reviews received, the Editorial Board decides on the publication of a manuscript. If both anonymous reviews are negative, the manuscript is not published. If only one of the reviews is negative and recommends rejecting a manuscript, a third anonymous reviewer is appointed. Reviewers remain anonymous both during and after reviewing, i.e. even after the publication of the manuscript. Authors remain anonymous until publication of their text.

Anonymous reviewers have the right to recommend the manuscript for publication without changes, with minor revisions, after a complete revision, or to reject it as unfit for publication. Any recommendation, suggestion, or criticism that the reviewer makes must be supported by objective and reasoned arguments.

Reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process and after its completion, i.e. after the manuscript has been published. Authors remain anonymous until their text is published.

Anonymous reviewers are required to familiarize themselves with the Reviewers’ Ethical Rules and Obligations. By uploading the review to the OJS Manuscript Management System, reviewers agree to abide by these Reviewers’ Ethical Rules and Obligations as described by the journal Contrastive Linguistics.

Reviewers may be included in the List of Reviewers of the journal Contrastive Linguistics after approval by the Editorial Board.

Anonymous reviewers receive a certificate for their reviews upon expressly stating such a wish.