Reviewers 

Duties of reviewers 

The editorial policy of the “College of Tourism – Blagoevgrad Yearbook” is based on the principle of double anonymous review. This principle guarantees impartiality in the evaluation of manuscripts, stimulates the search for originality and quality of developments. 

 

Reviews must state: 

  • Profile membership in the “Yearbook of the College of Tourism – Blagoevgrad”;
  • Adequacy of title;
  • Actuality of the development;
  • Availability of a high-quality and comprehensive summary;
  • Availability of keywords;
  • Availability of JEL.

 

Reviewers should justify: 

  • Originality of the manuscript;
  • Structure of the manuscript;
  • Theory, methodology, research;
  • Correctness of results and deductions (conclusions)

 

The conclusion of the review is presented as follows:

  • Accepted – the reviewer substantiates his recommendation in the analysis of the results
  • Accepted after minimal corrections – if the manuscript meets the evaluation criteria but needs some corrections. The reviewer submits written recommendations to the author
  • It is accepted after revision and consideration of the reviewers’ notes – if the manuscript as a whole meets the requirements, but gaps are found according to some of the criteria, it is returned to the author for revision. In this case, the reviewer points out the weak points and addresses the comments to the author. After the necessary improvements have been made, the manuscripts are resubmitted to the editor. They are reviewed again by the reviewers and consent is given for publication
  • Rejected – if the manuscript does not have the necessary qualities and does not meet the journal’s criteria

 

Additionally, in the course of the review, the following are indicated:

  • The type of article (conceptual, research)
  • Discovered cases of plagiarism, conflict of interest or other unethical practices
  • Reviews must be submitted within the deadline, according to the journal’s editorial policy. In cases of delay or impossibility to prepare an expected review, the editors must be notified promptly
  • If the reviewer doubts the good faith of the author, he communicates this to the editor confidentially and in writing