Abstracted and indexed in international databases:

  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • EBSCO
  • ERIH PLUS
  • Medline
  • Ministry of Science and Higher Education list of scored journals
  • PsychINFO
  • PubMed
  • Scopus

Beginning with V.8(1)2012, ACP is indexed and abstracted in Thomson Reuter's databases:

  • Social Sciences Citation Index
  • Journal Citation Reports/Social Sciences Edition
  • Current Contents/Social and Behavioral Sciences

Supported by:

  • Ministry of Science and Higher Education in Poland
  • University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw, Poland
  • University of Vienna, Austria
  • University of Twente, The Netherlands
  • Jagiellonian University, Poland
  • Section General Psychology of the German Psychological Society

Peer-review process

Unbiased, independent, critical assessment is an intrinsic part of all scholarly work. Peer review is the critical assessment of manuscripts submitted to ACP made by experts who are not part of the editorial staff. Peer review helps the editor decide which manuscripts are suitable for publication in ACP and helps authors and editors to improve the quality of reporting.

The review process in ACP is one-sided blind. In this type of review the reviewers remain anonymous to the authors. This allows the reviewers to be free in expressing their real opinions about the manuscript. The authors are requested to indicate 4 recommended reviewers of their paper, however, the editor is free in his decision on the selection of reviewers. The authors can also indicate if they have a non-preferred reviewer.

All submitted manuscripts will be initially assessed by the editor for suitability for the journal and for fulfilment of formal requirements. Papers deemed suitable are subject to at least two independent outside reviews which assess the scientific quality of the paper. In case of obtaining contradictory conclusions from the reviewers, or in any case of doubt about the decision, the editor may send the manuscript for further independent review. The reviewers need to declare whether they have any conflict of interest before reviewing the paper. The editor is responsible for the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of articles. The editor's decision is final.

ACP does not disclose information about manuscripts (including their receipt, content, status in the reviewing process, criticism by reviewers, or ultimate fate) to anyone other than the authors and reviewers. ACP will not keep copies of rejected manuscripts.

 

Guidelines for Reviewers

Peer review plays an important role in ensuring the integrity of the scholarly works. The process depends to a large extent on trust, and requires that everyone involved behaves responsibly and ethically. The COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers (http://publicationethics.org/) set out the basic principles and standards to which all peer reviewers should adhere during the peer-review process. It is hoped they will provide helpful guidance to researchers, be a reference for journals and editors in guiding their reviewers, and act as an educational resource for institutions in training their students and researchers.

We encourage the reviewers to get acquainted with basic principles of ethics in the peer review process which can be found at http://publicationethics.org/.