To ensure the quality of submitted manuscripts, they are reviewed by an independent, external peer-reviewer  whois expert in the field.

After submission of the manuscript, the Editor-in-Chief decides whether to initiate the peer-review process, which requires that the publication meets the aims and requirements of the journal in terms of both content and form. Manuscripts that do not meet the profile of StThTr may be automatically rejected by the Editor-in-Chief without peer review. If the Editor-in-Chief judges that the submitted manuscript meets the basic requirements of the journal, he/she will forward it to the Associate Editor, who will forward the manuscript to an appropriate peer reviewer.

The manuscript submitted for peer review will be evaluated by a reviewer on a five-point scale according to the following criteria:

Compliance with content requirements:

  • Originality of the manuscript (e.g., new research results);
  • Correctness of the research methodology (e.g., the soundness of the conclusions);
  • Actuality and importance of the topic.

Compliance with formal requirements:

  • Logical structure (e.g., consistency between title and manuscript content, consistency between manuscript, abstract and keywords);
  • Language skills of the manuscript (e.g., appropriate academic language);
  • Structure of the manuscript (e.g., proportionality of parts).

    The journal maintains double anonymity so that neither the reviewers nor the authors can know each other's identities (double-blind peer review). Reviewers may be members of the Editorial Board and the International Advisory Board of the Journal or other experts.

    Peer-reviewed papers fall into three categories:

    • accepted for publication (without modification);
    • accepted for publication after revision (modifications suggested by the reviewer);
    • rejected (the manuscript does not meet the academic standard of the journal).

    Reviews will be sent to the author(s).

    If the paper undergoes revision, a members of the Editorial Board will review the revised paper to determine if it is consistent with the recommendations of the earlier reviewer.

    The Editor-in-Chief decides on the publication of the final version of the manuscript based on the opinion of the reviewers and the Editorial Board.