Evaluation and review procedures
Review Process
The manuscript evaluation process follows a set of Editorial policies and Instructions for contributors available for inspection here and on the PAM journal’s website.
Information on submissions is not disclosed to anyone but the Editorial team, Editorial Board, and Advisory Committee. members, reviewers, and Publisher, as appropriate.
Manuscripts are accepted for review with the understanding that the same work has not been already published, that the submission has been approved by all of the authors and by the institution where the work was carried out and that all contributors are bylined in the article. The manuscripts are evaluated impartially, for their intellectual content, without regard to the authors’ race, religion, ethnic origin, citizenship, gender, sexual orientation, or political views.
The Journal follows a double-blind review procedure, with each article subjected to two independent reviewers. The reviewers are chosen from external institutions and/or the extended PAM Editorial and Advisory Boards (in the latter case only one reviewer can be a member of the extended Board). An effort is made to select reviewers based on their research specialization. The reviewer evaluates the manuscript based on topic significance and relevance, originality of research, methodology, quality, and clarity of the presentation. Timeliness, impartiality and scholarly integrity are valued traits of all reviewers for PAM. Conflicts of interest should be reported to the Editor in Chief.
Reviewers are asked to complete reviews within a 21-day period, either online or in an interactive pdf file returned by e-mail, or inform the Journal’s Secretary about difficulties with meeting the deadline. Reviewers are welcome to mark up the manuscript or write their comments in a separate file if they deem it necessary. If a reviewer does not feel competent to evaluate the paper, s/he is kindly requested to indicate an alternative reviewer.
Reviewers recommend to the editors whether to accept a paper substantially as is, with modifications, return for rewriting and another round of reviews, or to reject it altogether. Reviewers can call for another round of reviews if there are major changes suggested. If two reviewers disagree fundamentally, a third reviewer is invited to evaluate the manuscript.
Reviewers for the double-blind reviewing process implemented in the journal are selected from mainstream academia, care being taken to ensure academic reliability and confidentiality of research. Reviewers are obliged to follow confidentiality and conflict of interest guidelines and should inform the Editor of issues in this respect. Reviewers are expected to be objective in their reviews, identify potential cases of malpractice, avoiding personal criticism of the author; they are encouraged to comment extensively, if needed, on issues of concern, whether academic or related to research misconduct. Their input may go beyond evaluation; in post-review processing, assisting in establishing the final form of the paper and improve the publication through communication with the Authors.
Members of the Editorial Board and Advisory Committee, being experts in their respective fields, can be called on as reviewers for individual papers (in such instances, the other reviewer must be external). They are obliged to follow the same standards as external reviewers.
In cases of conflicting opinions that the Chief Editor cannot resolve internally, advice will be sought from the Editorial Board and Advisory Committee.
Submissions from PAM Editors or Members of the Editorial Board
The PAM journal accepts papers authored by its Editors and Editorial Board Members on condition of non-involvement. In case of handling such submissions, the journal ensures that all editorial processes are fully independent of the said author to ensure an unbiased review and acceptance procedure.
The Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology, which established the journal and which is associated with the publication of the journal today, does not exercise any forms of influence on the published matter.