PJOES Instructions for Reviewers

Thank you for agreeing to review for the Polish Journal of Environmental Studies (PJOES). Your valuable expertise and objective evaluation are crucial to our commitment to publishing original and high-quality environmental research.

1. The PJOES Peer Review Model (Semi-Blind)
PJOES uses a semi-blind review process:
• Reviewer Anonymity: Your identity remains confidential to the authors.
• Author Disclosure: The manuscript you receive includes the names and affiliations of the authors. Please use this knowledge only to assess potential conflicts of interest, not to influence your objective scientific judgment.

2. Ethical Obligations
Please notify the Executive Editor immediately if any of the following apply:
• Conflict of Interest: You have a personal, financial, competitive, or institutional relationship with the authors that could prevent an impartial review.
• Confidentiality Breach: You must treat the manuscript as confidential. Do not share it or use any non-public information from it in your own research.
• Timeliness: Please commit to completing and submitting the review by the agreed-upon deadline.

3. Reviewer Deliverables
Your review must be submitted as a single document containing both the Standardized Checklist (Scorecard) and the Detailed Written Comments.

A. Standardized Checklist (Scorecard)
Please complete the following checklist categories. Your responses here are visible to the editors and inform the final decision.

Evaluation Category	Required Assessment
Overall Recommendation	Select one: Accept, Accept after minor changes suggested by reviewer, Accept after major changes suggested by reviewer, or Reject.
Importance of Results	Assess the significance of the findings (e.g., important, average).
Data Verification	Do the methods/data support the conclusions? (Yes/No).
Length Appropriateness	Is the manuscript length appropriate for its content? (Yes/No).
Publication Type	Specify the format (e.g., Original full paper, Review article, Short communication).
Linguistic Correctness	Evaluate grammar, structure, and vocabulary (Good, Needs Improvement, etc.).
Section Quality	Evaluate the quality of sections like Abstract, Introduction, Figures, Tables, and References.

B. Detailed Written Report
Your written report provides the essential justification for your scorecard and should be divided into two sections:

I. Confidential Information for Editors (Not Visible to Authors)
• Provide a brief, honest summary of the manuscript's strengths and weaknesses for the editorial team.
• Mention any suspected ethical issues (e.g., concerns about data integrity or potential undeclared conflicts).

II. Information for Authors (Visible to Authors)
This section must be professional, constructive, and clearly written.
1. Summary of the Work: Briefly state the central research question and the paper's core finding.

2. Major Comments (Critical Issues):
o List 3-5 major, indispensable issues that must be addressed before acceptance. These should focus on Originality, Methodological Rigor, Statistical Soundness, or Interpretation of Results.
o Example: "The statistical model lacks justification for selecting control variables; please replace or add necessary controls and provide supplementary analysis."

3. Minor Comments (Clarity and Style):
o List specific, detailed suggestions for improving readability and compliance with journal standards.
o Include suggestions on grammar, figure aesthetics, table formatting (must conform to the journal style), and compliance with the citation style (e.g., quotation marks).
Your thoroughness is vital to our editorial mission. Thank you for your support of PJOES.