The Review Procedure
for articles submitted to the Archives of Foundry Engineering agrees with the recommendations of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education published in a booklet: ‘Dobre praktyki w procedurach recenzyjnych w nauce’ (MNiSW, Dobre praktyki w procedurach recenzyjnych w nauce, Warszawa 2011).
Papers submitted to the Editorial System
are primarily screened by editors with respect to scope, formal issues and used template. Texts with obvious errors (formatting other than requested, missing references, evidently low scientific quality) will be rejected at this stage or will be sent for the adjustments.
Once verified each article is checked by the anti-plagiarism system Cross Check powered by iThenticate®. After the positive response, the article is moved into: Initially verified manuscripts
. When the similarity level is too high, the article will be rejected. There is no strict rule (i.e., percentage of the similarity), and it is always subject to the Editor’s decision.
Initially verified manuscripts are then sent to at least four independent referees outside the author’s institution and at least two of them outside of Poland, who: have no conflict of interests with the author,
are not in professional relationships with the author,
are competent in a given discipline and have at least a doctorate degree and respective
have a good reputation as reviewers.
The review form is available online at the Journal’s Editorial System and contains the following sections: 1. Article number and title in the Editorial System 2. The statement of the Reviewer (to choose the right options): I declare that I have not guessed the identity of the Author. I declare that I have guessed the identity of the Author, but there is no conflict of interest 3. Detailed evaluation of the manuscript against other researches published to this point:
Do you think that the paper title corresponds with its contents?
Do you think that the abstract expresses the paper contents well?
Are the results or methods presented in the paper novel?
Do the author(s) state clearly what they have achieved?
Do you find the terminology employed proper?
Do you find the bibliography representative and up-to-date?
Do you find all necessary illustrations and tables?
Do you think that the paper will be of interest to the journal readers?
Yes No 4. Reviewer conclusion Accept without changes
Accept after changes suggested by reviewer.
Rate manuscript once again after major changes and another review
Reject 5. Information for Editors (not visible for authors).
6. Information for Authors
Reviewing is carried out in the double blind process (authors and reviewers do not know each other’s names).
The appointed reviewers obtain summary of the text and it is his/her decision upon accepting/rejecting the paper for review within a given time period 21 days.
The reviewers are obliged to keep opinions about the paper confidential and to not use knowledge about it before publication.
The reviewers send their review to the Archives of Foundry Engineering
by Editorial System
. The review is archived in the system.
Editors do not accept reviews, which do not conform to merit and formal rules of scientific reviewing like short positive or negative remarks not supported by a close scrutiny or definitely critical reviews with positive final conclusion. The reviewer’s remarks are sent to the author. He/she has to consider all remarks and revise the text accordingly.
The author of the text has the right to comment on the conclusions in case he/she does not agree with them. He/she can request the article withdrawal at any step of the article processing.
The Editor-in-Chief (supported by members of the Editorial Board) decides on publication based on remarks and conclusions presented by the reviewers, author’s comments and the final version of the manuscript.
The final Editor’s decision can be as follows: Accept without changes
The rules for acceptance or rejection of the paper and the review form are available on the Web page of the AFE publisher.
Once a year Editorial Office publishes present list of cooperating reviewers.
Reviewing is free of charge.
All articles, including those rejected and withdrawn, are archived in the Editorial System