Peer Review

The first round of evaluation is done by the editors and the members of the Editorial Board. Each submission is checked for 1) meeting the formal requirements set out in the Formatting guidelines; 2) similarity with published sources, using iThenticate (papers with a similarity index above 25% including references, or 15% excluding references, are rejected); 3) its contribution to knowledge; and 4) its potential to attract the interest of an international audience. Papers meeting these requirements are sent for review.

TMP uses a double-blind peer review system. Author details are submitted on a separate title page and are removed from the manuscript, so authors and reviewers do not know each other’s identity. Each paper is reviewed by at least two respected scholars of the field (holding a PhD), based in Miskolc and at partner universities in Europe and around the world.

Reviewers rate the paper on a 1–4 scale (4 – Excellent, 3 – Good, 2 – Fair, 1 – Poor) against ten criteria: 1) abstract; 2) structure; 3) literature and citations; 4) theory and key concepts; 5) research design and methods; 6) data analysis; 7) discussion; 8) conclusions; 9) contribution to knowledge; 10) clarity and readability. A paper is considered for publication only if its average score is higher than 2.5. Reviewers also give detailed comments to the authors and recommend one of the following: 1) accept; 2) minor revision; 3) major revision; 4) reject.

Revised manuscripts are checked by the editors. Where needed, the reviewers are asked to assess the revised version again. The final decision on acceptance or rejection is made by the Editorial Board, based on the reviewers’ reports.