Peer Review Procedure

PEER REVIEW SHEET RO / EN

Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Theologia Orthodoxa has adopted the double-blind peer review system. The guest editor(s), together with the journal’s editor(s) in charge of the special-themed issue, first select the submissions according to their relevance to the topic. Submissions passing the initial editorial screening enter the double-blind peer review process. As a rule, this involves the anonymous evaluation of each submission by 2 external referees (from outside both Babeş-Bolyai University and the institution to which the author of the article is affiliated) identified as specialists in the respective academic area.

The review of the submissions is done:

- through elaborate comments on the text, which allow the reviewers to freely and constructively express their suggestions, criticisms, and appreciations.

- by filling the peer-review form that evaluates the following aspects:

• the clarity of the title and its appropriateness to the content of the manuscript,
  • the way in which the abstract captures the content of the manuscript,
  • whether the introductory section outlines the relevance of the article for the given field, offers a good overview of previous studies on the same topic, and presents a clearly formulated thesis,
  • whether the paper has a solid and well-informed theoretical background, relevant for the analysis/ argumentation,
  • the originality of the paper and the significance of its contribution to the field,
  • how the concluding section summarizes the results and the consequences/implications,
  • the quality and relevance of references,
  • appropriate citation and referencing,
  • stylistic and grammatical accuracy.

The reviewer’s decision materializes in one of the three possible recommendations, namely: acceptance in the initial form, conditional acceptance (minor/ moderate/ major changes in form, style and/or content), or rejection. In the event of significant discrepancy between the recommendations of the two reviewers, a third specialist is called upon to assist in the final decision of publication or rejection.