AMU Press makes every effort to ensure that the books it publishes meet both academic and editorial criteria. One of the most important components of ensuring the high scientific level of books published by AMU Press is the procedure for reviewing them, the principles of which are presented below.

Selecting and designating reviewers

1. The review process is carried out on an ongoing basis in accordance with the rules adopted by the Publishing Board: at least 2 publishing reviews are required.
2. Reviewers of the book shall be appointed by the Publishing Board of the Faculty or Branch of University of Adam Mickiewicz and approved by the Head of the Board, independent academics (post-doctoral or titular professors) with recognized achievements in the field within which the subject matter of the book falls.
3. Reviewers of the book are employed at academic institutions in Poland and abroad – these are different to the institution at which the author is employed; an exception can be where there is only a small group of specialists in a given field subject to review.
4. The author of the book has no influence on the selection and appointment of reviewers.
5. Reviewers and the author of the book must not have a close professional or personal relationship with each other - any conflict of interest is ruled out. A conflict of interest is considered to exist between the reviewer and the author in situations as:
   a) direct personal relationships (kinship, legal ties, conflict),
   b) professional supervisory relations,
   c) direct scientific cooperation in the last two years preceding the preparation of the review.
6. Reviewers and author must not be co-authors of a previously produced publication or co-editors of the same collective work.
7. In the case of habilitation monographs or professorial monographs, the reviewer cannot be the author's dissertation supervisor.

Guidelines for reviewers

1. On the basis of the information presented about the author and the text, reviewers make a decision to review the monograph, taking into account their substantive competence and the deadline for the review.
2. Designated reviewers should notify AMU Press of any conflict of interest and, in such a case, resign from preparing the review.
3. Should the reviewer decide that the work does not meet the criteria of academicism and is not eligible for publication, they should not, in any event, abandon their review. In such a case, they should prepare a well-reasoned review with a negative conclusion.
4. The review must be in writing and must not be a mere description of the reviewed work; it hshould be an in-depth and well-reasoned assessment of the work with a clear conclusion.
5. In the event of it being necessary to make major/fundamental changes to the reviewed manuscript, reviewers will be provided with a revised version for review in order to make a final decision on recommending the work for publication and agreeing to have their name included in the book as a reviewer.
6. Reviewers are bound by the principle of confidentiality, and may not consult the content of their review, nor disseminate its content in any way.

Guidelines for Authors

1. Once reviewers have been appointed by AMU Press, the author does not have the right to request that they be changed.
2. The author does not have the right to request a change of reviewers after receiving the reviewed manuscript.
3. The author must respond in writing to the content of the review.
4. The author should correct the text in accordance with the reviewers' comments or explain in writing why he or she does not intend to take into account a particular comment. The reviewers are provided with the content of the author's response for reviewing purposes.

Other general principles

1. Reviews that do not meet the substantive and formal requirements of a scientific review shall not be accepted.
2. The publisher archives both reviews and author responses.
3. Reviews are prepared on the basis of relevant formal agreements with reviewers.