Description of peer review process conducted by the Journal

Each article received by the Editorial Board is entered in a register and gets a registration number. The editor-in-chief and the editorial secretary send the article for evaluation without the author’s name, but with the registration number, to two reviewers, who are included in the database of the Institute of Cultural Heritage.

The reviewers of the Journal are personalities representing the scientific or cultural life recognized at national and international level who hold a PhD of doctor habilitat degree in the field.

The type of review undertaken by the Journal is that of double blind peer-review: two persons who do not know the identity of the author review each article. The authors do not know the identity of the reviewers either.

The reviewers assess each article according to the indicators of quality and the form below:


of article No. ________entitled (the title of the article) submitted for publication in the



No. Criteria


Conclusions / comments
1 Novelty of the topic and scientific originality of the article


Correspondence of the title to the contents and bibliography of the article
3. Relevance of the summary and key words
4. Scientific quality of the article
5. Stylistic and graphic presentation of the article
6. Methodology of the research
7. Completeness of sources and references
8. Processing and theoretical analysis, author’s critical and interpretative involvement
9. Reflection of the purpose and the rationale of conclusions
10. Recommendations




Or: Conditionally accepted (remarks)

Or: Rejected

11. Reviewer: Name, surname



The Editor-in-chief and the editorial secretary collect the received reviews in a separate folder for each issue. The contents and the conclusions of the evaluation of the article are made public at the meeting of the Editorial Board without mentioning the name of the reviewer.

The Editorial Board adopts the decision by open vote: to accept or reject the article for publication in the journal.

The decision is made in accordance with the following procedure:

  • If both reviewers recommend to accept the reviewed article for publication, the Editorial Board adopts the decision to publish the article.
  • If both reviewers have different recommendations (one accepts, the other rejects), the article is submitted for review to a third reviewer and the reviews and arguments of the reviewers are debated at the meeting of the Editorial Board and the decision to recommend or to reject the article is made by the majority vote.
  • If both reviewers reject the evaluated article, the Editorial Board adopts the decision to reject the article.

The author of the rejected article has the right to submit other articles or an improved version of the rejected article for publication in the next issue of the Journal.

The articles accepted for publication are included in the forthcoming issue of the Journal.