PEER REVIEW PROCESS
“Muzyka” uses double-blind peer review (the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers, and the reviewers do not know the identity of the authors). For texts from the “Articles”, “Materials”, and “Contributions" sections, at least two reviewers from different academic centers are appointed. For texts from the “Review Articles” section, at least one reviewer is appointed. All reviewers must have a Ph.D. degree. Texts from the “Responses”, “Pro memoria”, and “Informations” sections, which are evaluated only by the editorial board, are marked as non-peer-reviewed. The decision to accept a peer-reviewed text for publication is made within 3 months of its submission.
Rules of the double-blind peer review process
1. We invite reviewers on the basis of their competence and professional expertise. The reviewers are asked to provide a fair, honest, and respectful assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript, containing possible suggestions for further work which the editors will forward to the author ensuring that anonymity is maintained. By submitting an article for publication in “Muzyka”, the author agrees to undergo the review procedure adopted by the journal. Texts are sent for review after being qualified by the editorial board, but before editorial processing and proofreading.
2. We make every effort to avoid selecting reviewers who may have competing interests that might prevent them from providing a fair and unbiased opinion. In case of identifying a competing interest, the reviewer is required to notify the editors immediately and refrain from looking at the manuscript and associated material until they agree with editors on how to proceed in this particular case.
3. Reviewers are not members of the “Muzyka” editorial team. One of the two reviewers may be a member of the Academic Advisory Board, provided the text’s topic falls within their area of research. Individuals employed in other departments of the Institute of Art of the Polish Academy of Sciences may be invited to review in exceptional and well-justified cases. In each year, at least 20% of reviewers come from foreign institutions.
4. We respect the confidentiality of the peer review process. The manuscripts are anonymized before reviewing; at all stages of the review process the author and reviewers remain anonymous, their identity is strictly confidential to members of the editorial team. Reviewers may not use the manuscript they evaluate in any unauthorized way. Reviewers do not recommend to authors, without specific justification, that their work be cited.
5. We provide reviewers with substantive and ethical reviewing principles (based on COPE recommendations), which they accept by agreeing to perform the review. Their opinions are inserted into a review form provided by the editors. Reviewers should immediately report misconduct and any suspected breach of publication ethics by an author or an editor to the editorial team. At the same time the editorial team remains cautious of possible attempts at fraud or manipulation in peer reviews or reviewers’ unauthorized use of manuscripts for their own purposes; any suspected case will be investigated and acted on according to the COPE guidelines.
6. At the beginning of the calendar year, we publish on our website a list of peer reviewers who collaborated with "Muzyka" in the previous year.
Stages of the review process
1. Submitted texts undergo a preliminary evaluation by the editorial team, which may reject them at this stage if they violate publication ethics, lack originality, fall outside the journal’s scope, or do not comply with the author guidelines. This preliminary evaluation is conducted within 4 weeks of the text’s submission.
2. The manuscripts qualified for review are anonymized and sent to reviewers without any prior editing. This stage takes about 6 weeks. The editorial team reserves the right to prolong the peer-review process where needed.
3. The reviewers assess the manuscripts in writing, using a review form. They evaluate, in particular, the originality of approach in the light of recent research, the relevance of methodology and its application, the use of relevant source materials as well as the soundness of argumentation and clarity of exposition. Reviewers are required to observe the principles of anonymity, confidentiality, and integrity. A review must include a well-grounded conclusion and recommendation to either accept the manuscript for publication, send it for corrections, or reject it.
4. If the suggestions and recommendations of peer reviewers diverge, the editorial board may invite a third peer reviewer.
5. Editors pass on the suggestions made by peer reviewers to the authors, striving to observe the principle of anonymity. The editors also provide authors with editorial comments.
6. The final decision to accept the manuscript, send it for corrections, or reject it is taken by the editor-in-chief on the basis of:
- the quality of manuscript and the research it presents;
- importance of the work for the research community and the readers of “Muzyka”;
- the peer reviewers’ comments;
- legal requirements that are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
