Articles submitted to the Editorial Office of Sudia Mazowieckie undergo an initial internal review (compliance with the scope of the journal is a prerequisite for further consideration). Upon receiving a positive assessment from the Editor-in-Chief, the article is forwarded to two independent subject reviewers from outside the affiliated institution, who must declare the absence of any conflict of interest with the authors. A conflict of interest is understood as direct personal relationships (kinship, legal ties, conflict), professional subordination, or direct scholarly collaboration within the two years preceding the preparation of the review.

Each reviewer completes a standardized review form established by the Editorial Board (see link below) and issues an explicit recommendation regarding the acceptance or rejection of the article.

The author is informed of the review outcome and may correspond with the Editorial Office regarding comments or publication eligibility. The final decision on acceptance for publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief. The Editorial Board reserves the right to return the manuscript to the author for revision in the case of a negative review.

Only articles that have received two positive reviews are accepted for publication. In the event of one positive and one negative review, the Editor-in-Chief appoints a third reviewer (super-reviewer). Based on the outcome of this third review (positive or negative), the article is either accepted for publication or rejected by the Editor-in-Chief.

The journal applies a double-blind peer review process, meaning that both reviewers remain anonymous to the authors, and authors remain anonymous to the reviewers.

The names of reviewers cooperating with Studia Mazowieckie are published on the journal’s website.

All manuscripts accepted for publication are subject to plagiarism screening using the Similarity Check service provided by Crossref, based on the iThenticate text-comparison software.