Reviewers
In an effort to ensure academic integrity and a high level of quality of the journal itself manuscripts accepted for the peer review process are all sent to at least two peer reviewers. The reviewing process is mutually anonymous - the identity of the author remains unknown until the text is published while the identity of the reviewer of an individual text may be released only with the approval of the reviewer.
The preferred period for a review is four weeks. While we prefer clear and concise reviews, a review should not be shorter than 500 words. Other than that, the length of review and the scope of comments and criticism is left to the discretion of the reviewer.
The reviewers must affirm that the article they have received is in their area of expertise. Upon receiving the article, the reviewers should warn the Administrative and Editorial Office in the case of conflict of interests. The reviewer has to contact the Administrative and Editorial Office if there is any suspicion that the work has been plagiarized or if they suspect there is any other form of violation of academic integrity.
The article they have received must not be shared, whether in whole or in part, with a third party. The reviewer cannot use any of the information or data from the article in their own work before the results have been published.
The reviewers oblige they will deliver the review in time and that the review will be constructive and in the best interest of the quality of the journal Disputatio philosophica.
Disputatio philosophica does not provide the reviewers with a finance fee for contributing to the peer review process.
