bg | en 
Bulgarian Journal of Crop Science   ISSN 0568-465X
Array ( [session_started] => 1685505255 [LEPTON_SESSION] => 1 )


Forgot Details? Sign-up

For Reviewers
After midwifery of manuscript in editorial staff, he is having double blind – peer review. The Journal has duty to ensure fairly review. The reviewers shall be obligated to make the verification of manuscript by ethical and responsible way, who is accords to politic and demands of the journal. Is allowed the reviewers to provide confidential comments to editor of journal. Also, it is allowed to provide comments to the author(s). The journal may ask recommendations for adoption, reject of the manuscript. Each recommendation shall be in comply with comments in review.

Responsibilities of reviewer

The reviewer shall assist to quality improvement of the manuscript with objective analysis. He shall provide impartial, construction and detailed estimate of the manuscript scientific content.

The reviewer shall value the manuscript confidentiality. The manuscript should not be revealed or deliberated with third parties.

The reviewer should know all potential conflicts of interest (finances, institutional, join or other relationships between reviewer and author). He must warn the editor for this. If it is necessary, the reviewer must quit with manuscript assessed.

The reviewer must quit with manuscript assessed if he finds that is fall within its remit. This is the same if the reviewer finds that when in the peer review process.

The reviewer appreciated objective scientific value and quality of the manuscript without personal comments for author or manuscript.

Review criteria

The reviewer shall conduct an impact assessment based on the following criteria:

Is the article subject within the scope of the journal?

Are presented in article new and original facts and patterns?

Does the title give a clear and accurate picture for article content?

Does the abstract reflect concisely and clearly the main content and scientific contributions of article?

Are the keywords correctly selected?

Is the objective clearly stated? Is the objective consistent with the findings of the research?

Are the methods used clear and are they clearly presented?

Are the results clearly presented and analyzed?

Are the interpretations and conclusions correct and are they derived from the data?

Is it applied suitable statistic method?

Is it deep the discussion in accordance with contemporary state of the problem?

Are the graphical elements well-formed and are they present adequately in research?

Is the literature cited related to object of research and is she presented as required?

Overall assessment of article:

  1. The article may be published without any corrections.
  2. The article may be published with little corrections.
  3. The article may be published with big corrections.
  4. The article was rejected in its current form but can be send again.
  5. The article was rejected and cannot be send again.