For Peer Review Process
We accept research papers (empirical studies) as well as theoretical studies. Book reviews will be also considered for publication. After submission there is an initial screening of the paper by PsyRB`s editors, whereby editors decide whether the submission is appropriate to be send to review or not ('desk reject'). Occasionally, editors may recommend a revision before sending the submission to review. This initial screening usually needs less than one week. The articles that are published in the Journal of Psychological Research (in the Balkans) (PsyRB) follow a double-blind peer-review procedure. Each paper registered for publication is separately assessed and reviewed by two independent reviewers who will not be aware of the author’s identity. In their turn, the authors do not know the reviewers’ identity. The scientific review is accomplished by outstanding specialists in the field of the article under review. The appointed scientific reviewers may belong to the scientific committee of the Bulletin or not (see the Referees’ Board as well).
Having followed the editing requirements, the manuscript is sent to the two reviewers appointed by the editorial board for that respective topic. They must send their decision to the Editor within 15 days after they have received the manuscript to be reviewed. The assessment criteria are mainly the following (REVIEW FORM):
І. IS THE ARTICLE TOPIC APPROPRIATE FOR THE REVIEW?
ІІ. EVALUATION OF THE SUBMITTED ARTICLE:
- Article title is precise and correct.
- The abstract reflects the content of the article correctly.
- Use and number of keywords/key phrases.
- Focus and rationale of the paper.
- Theoretical framework and related literature.
- Contribution to the academic debate.
- The background of the issue studied is presented completely enough and correct estimation of the contribution of previous researchers, without any regional or other limitations, is given in the article.
- Appropriateness of the research/study method.
- The argumentation of the main thesis is compelling.
- The narrative is clear and sufficient.
- Tables, figures and charts (maps) are necessary and presented according to the requirements.
- The conclusions which are made arise from the content.
- The article is of interest for many readers of the review.
- Ethics is observed.
- Standard of English is observed.
- Reference list is adequate and correctly cited.
ІІІ. NOTES AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REFEREE TO THE AUTHOR
ІV. RECOMMENDATION TO THE PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH (in the BALKANS) (PsyRB)
The reviewer shall express his decision in one of the following terms:
- Accepted without objections.
- To be published after insignificant changes according to the notes in this review form.
- To be published after significant changes according to the notes in this review form and after a check by the referee.
- To be rejected and to encourage the author to rewrite the article and submit it again for reviewing.
- To be rejected.
- OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REFEREE ABOUT APPEARANCE AND COMPOSITION OF THE ARTICLE BEFORE PUBLISHING
Besides the reasons concerning the scientific content of the article, the reviewer may reject the manuscript whenever he/she ascertains a case of plagiarism or compiling.
Ensuring a Blind Review
To ensure the integrity of the blind peer-review for submission to this journal, every effort should be made to prevent the identities of the authors and reviewers from being known to each other. This involves the authors, editors, and reviewers (who upload documents as part of their review) checking to see if the following steps have been taken with regard to the text and the file properties:
The authors of the document have deleted their names from the text, with "Author" and year used in the references and footnotes, instead of the authors' name, article title, etc.
With Microsoft Office documents, author identification should also be removed from the properties for the file (see under File in Word), by clicking on the following, beginning with File on the main menu of the Microsoft application: File > Save As > Tools (or Options with a Mac) > Security > Remove personal information from file properties on save > Save.
With PDFs, the authors' names should also be removed from Document Properties found under File on Adobe Acrobat's main menu.
The data collected from registered and non-registered users of this journal falls within the scope of the standard functioning of peer-reviewed journals. It includes information that makes communication possible for the editorial process; it is used to informs readers about the authorship and editing of content; and it enables collecting aggregated data on readership behaviors.
This journal’s editorial team uses this data to guide its work in publishing and improving this journal. The data will not be sold by this journal nor will it be used for purposes other than those stated here. The authors published in this journal are responsible for the human subject data that figures in the research reported here.
Those involved in editing this journal seek to be compliant with industry standards for data privacy, including the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) provision for "data subject rights" that include (a) breach notification, (b) right of access, (c) the right to be forgotten, (d) data portability, and (e) privacy by design. The GDPR also allows for the recognition of “the public interest in the availability of the data,” which has a particular saliency for those involved in maintaining, with the greatest integrity possible, the public record of scholarly publishing.