Article Evaluation Process

Home » Article Evaluation Process

Manuscripts submitted to the Urbanitas editorial office are registered and undergo a preliminary check by the Editor-in-Chief, who ensures their assignment to reviewers specialized in the thematic field of the paper.

The evaluation of articles is carried out through a double-blind peer review process, involving two independent reviewers, members of the Scientific Board or recognized experts in the relevant field. They assess the submissions in terms of scientific quality, thematic relevance, and compliance with editorial standards, providing comments and recommendations for improvement.

Both the Editorial Board and the reviewers may request revisions of the manuscripts and/or illustrative material prior to final acceptance. They may also provide comments regarding linguistic accuracy and grammatical correctness. All such issues are addressed before the actual editing stage.

The evaluation reports are compiled by the editorial office and communicated to the authors. Each evaluation concludes with one of the following recommendations:

  • acceptance without revisions;
  • acceptance subject to revision in accordance with the reviewers’ comments;
  • rejection of the manuscript.

In the case of divergent evaluations, the editorial office may appoint a third reviewer.

Evaluation Criteria

During the review process, manuscripts are assessed according to the following criteria:

  • compliance with the journal’s formatting guidelines and structure;
  • thematic relevance to the journal’s scope;
  • quality and rigor of the scientific content;
  • degree of originality;
  • clarity, coherence, and precision of expression;
  • absence of factual, conceptual, or interpretative errors and ambiguities;
  • adequacy and currency of bibliographic references.

Editorial Revisions

In addition to the scientific evaluation process, manuscripts may be subject to further editorial interventions. Authors will receive, where applicable, editable versions of the text containing editorial comments. Revisions will be carried out using Track Changes and/or Comments, in order to facilitate editorial dialogue and the integration of corrections.

Publication Schedule

  • The deadline for submission of manuscripts for the first annual issue is 31 December.
  • The initial editorial evaluation phase lasts approximately 4 weeks.
  • The peer review process is usually completed within a maximum of 8 weeks from entering this stage.
  • Publication of articles, both in print and online formats, begins on 1 May of the following year.

Rights and Responsibilities

  1. Authors are responsible for submitting original works that comply with current academic and ethical standards regarding plagiarism avoidance. Manuscripts must include an appropriate critical apparatus and relevant bibliography, formatted according to the journal’s standards.
  2. Authors are required to strictly follow the submission guidelines and referencing style guide.
  3. Both authors and reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest.
  4. Reviewers are required to ensure the confidentiality of the evaluation process and to provide objective, scientifically grounded assessments.
Scroll to Top