Reviewing process
Reviewing process
Reviewing process

The articles that are published in the Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal follow a double blind peer-review procedure.

The manuscript is submitted by author(s) in English language using the Open Journal Systems (OJS).

  • Received manuscripts are first examined by Editorial Board members (by Editor-in-chief or by the Deputy Editor-in-chief) according to Discobolul – Physical Education, Sports and Kinetotherapy Journal ‘technical’ requirements ( Incomplete manuscripts, if English is not of good standard, or papers that are not respecting the available Template (including information considering the preparation of the manuscript) will be returned to author(s) with suggestions for correction. After the paper is improved adequately, the manuscript receives a unique identification code which will be used in the following discussions related to the manuscript. At this stage the article is sent to two reviewers for scientific evaluation.
  • Each reviewer writes the Reviewer’s Report where he/she mentions one of the following:

- Accepted without any revisions - the journal will publish the paper in its original form;

- Accepted with minor changes - in this case the paper cannot be published, for the moment; the authors have to make necessary corrections;

- Accepted with major revisions (major flows are identified by the reviewers);

- Rejected - the research procedure, statistics, or figures are so poor that the merit of the manuscript cannot be assessed, the manuscript is just a small extension of a different article (often from the same authors), or the paper contains elements that are suspected to be plagiarized.

  • After the two independent reviewers endorsed publication, one of the Reviewing Editors reads, also, the manuscript, examining, mainly, the descriptive and inferential statistics and the research procedure.
  • The Proofreading Editor takes a critical look before publication. At this stage, also, if the Proofreading Editor considers that English is not of good standard, the manuscript can return to authors with suggestions for corrections.    


       If reviewers appear to differ in their opinion, the Editor-in-Chief or the Deputy Editor-in-chief together with a Reviewing Editor will assess the article, will consider all comments and take the final decision.         

       It should be noted that the author(s) must send the revised version of the article in 10 days’ time since he/she received the Reviewers’ Report or the Editorial Board’s feed-back. Then, the Editorial Board sends the revised version of the paper to the reviewer(s). This process lasts until the reviewer(s) endorses (or rejects) the manuscript.