Peer review

                                                                                                                                                           Paper review form

There are no submission or processing fees for this journal.

All submitted manuscripts are assessed by the editor(s) for suitability for the review process. The views of an Editorial Board member may be sought for further input towards this decision. To save authors and referees time, only those manuscripts judged most likely to meet the editorial criteria are sent out for formal review.

Manuscripts that are sent for formal review typically go to two referees, with expertise in the pertinent subject area. It is the major editorial policy to review the submitted articles as fast as possible.

Reviewers are asked whether the manuscript is scientifically sound and coherent, and will assess the manuscript quality. Reviewers are also asked to indicate which articles they consider to be especially interesting or significant.

The BUT shall not accept or publish manuscripts without prior peer review. Based on their advice, the editor decides:

- to accept the manuscript, with or without minor revision;

- to invite the authors to revise the manuscript to address specific concerns before a final decision is reached;

- to reject the manuscript, typically on grounds of specialist interest, lack of novelty, insufficient conceptual advance or major technical and/or interpretational problems.

Referees may recommend a particular course of action in their confidential comments to the editor, but should bear in mind that the editors may have to make a decision based on conflicting advice. Furthermore, editorial decisions are not a matter of counting votes or numerical rank assessments, but rather are based on an evaluation of the strengths of the arguments raised by each referee and by the authors.

The comments of the anonymous reviewers will be forwarded to authors.

Referees may be asked for further advice, particularly in cases when there is a certain level of disagreement among reviewers, or when the authors believe that they have been misunderstood in specific points. In certain cases, additional referees or members of our Editorial Board may be consulted to resolve disputes, but this is avoided unless there is a specific issue on which further advice is required.

Referee policy treats the contents of papers under review as privileged information not to be disclosed to others before publication. It is expected that no one with access to a paper under review will make any inappropriate use of the special knowledge which that access provides.

The review process shall ensure that all authors have equal opportunity for publication of their papers.

Acceptance and scheduling of publication of papers in these periodicals shall not be impeded by added criteria and procedures beyond those contained in the review process.

Submitted papers must be in English and should not have been published elsewhere or being currently under consideration by any other journal.

Authors are kindly asked to submit their manuscript according to the corresponding template for each series.

The Editor-in-Chief, co-editors and series editors will then make a decision about publication in the bulletin and authors will be notified.

All manuscripts accepted for publication are subject to editing by the publisher for presentation, style and grammar. The Editor's committee decision is final.