POLITYKA - Production Enginnering Archives

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur ad elit.
Morbi tincidunt libero ac ante accumsan.
Go to content

Policy of the Publishing House SMJiP

Production Engineering Archives is a peer-reviewed journal.
The ethics statements for Production Engineering Archives are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. For all parties involved in the act of publishing (the journal editor(s), the author, the peer reviewer and the publisher) should become familiar with the standards of ethical behavior used in the journal Production Engineering Archives.

Protection policy/ publication ethic
During the publication process, the Editors of the journal Production Engineering Archives respects both protection policy and publication ethic.
Other important standards respected by the Editors of the journal Production Engineering Archives:
Principle of fair play
Race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, origin, nationality, or political beliefs of the authors of works submitted for publication will not affect their assessment by Editorial Board and Scientific Committee.
Editorial Board and Scientific Committee keep confidential all information about the works provided by their authors. Information on manuscripts will not be discussed or disclosed to unauthorized persons - nobody will learn about them except the Editorial Board and reviewers selected to review these works.

Publishing procedure
Information for potential authors of the monograph
1. Potential authors of the publication in Production Engineering Archives should see all requirements available on the website of the journal:
2. The manuscript should be sent via submission system available on:
3. Only original materials, unpublished so far, not submitted for publication in another publishing house, without infringing any copyrights, legal and material interests of others within the meaning of the Polish Act of 4.02. 1994 on copyright and related rights (Dz. U. Nr 24, poz. 83), are accept for publishing.
4. During the publication process, the Editors of the journal Production Engineering Archives respects, among others, protection policy and publication ethic .
5. Materials published by the publishing house must be reviewed by at least two independent reviewers.
6. Before to publish, the publication is sent to the author(s), in order to make the last author's correction (acceptance).
7. Before printing the publication, author(s) is required to sign the Publication Right Form .

Procedure of reviewing the monograph
1. The reviewing procedure is in line with the recommendations of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Poland.
2. After the publisher accepts the submitted material as compatible with the profile of the publishing house, one of the members of the Editors select two reviewers in the given scientific areas (in accordance with the double-blind review principle).
3. Selected Reviewers must guarantee: independence of opinions, confidentiality of the substantive content of the materials as well as opinions about them, according to Policy of Production Engineering Archives.
4. The reviewer may prepare a review free of charge or for a fee (contract for specific work).
5. Personal details of the Reviewers are not public, and their declassification occurs only in special cases at the Author's request and with the consent of the Reviewer.
6. The review should be made in the online review system (after receiving the login and password) via review system available on:
7. Author(s) must refer to the review and take into account the reviewers' comments in their manuscript. In some cases, he can convince reviewers to his idea.
8. The final decision on the publication of the manuscript is made by the Editors based on a careful analysis of the comments contained in the reviews.
9. In the event of a negative review of the publication, the Editors decides to send the manuscript to another reviewer or about its disqualification.
10. Non-scientific texts do not require a review and the Editors decides about their qualification for printing.

Manuscript’s qualification / rejection criteria
A review form (online, login required) is available on the website of the journal. The review must end with an unambiguous conclusion of the Reviewer regarding the to the approval of the article for publication or its rejection. The reviewer can specify in the review form whether the article should be:
• published without revision,
• published with minor revision,
• published with major revision,
• re-reviewed again after revision,
• rejected.
If there is a need of revision, the author(s) is obliged to correct the text, introduce additions and changes required by the Reviewers. After the revision, the Editors decide about manuscript’s publication.
If the Reviewer in the review form indicated that the manuscript after the revision should be re-review, the manuscript after authors’ correction is again subjected to the review process by the same Reviewers.
In the case of one negative review, the Editors choose a third Reviewer. In the case of two negative reviews, the manuscript is rejected.

Back to content