Guidelines for Reviewers
The Scientific Bulletin of “Nicolae Bălcescu” Land Forces Academy applies a double-blind peer review process, ensuring that both reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the evaluation procedure.
Upon submission, all manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation to determine relevance to the journal’s scope, compliance with the author guidelines, originality and scientific quality, and adherence to ethical and editorial standards.
Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s technical or scientific requirements may be returned to the authors for revision before entering the peer review process.
Eligible manuscripts are sent for evaluation to at least two independent reviewers with recognized expertise in the relevant scientific field. One reviewer may be affiliated with the “Nicolae Bălcescu” Land Forces Academy, while the second reviewer is usually from another academic or research institution. In specific cases, a third reviewer may be appointed.
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts using the official Evaluation Form approved by the Scientific Council of the Academy.
The review process assesses relevance of the abstract, scientific argumentation, presentation of some analysis methods, accuracy of using the investigation instruments, novelty of the topic, the originality of solving the addressed problem, the topicality and the utility of the suggested solution, clarity of conclusions and further research directions, and relevance of bibliographic sources.
Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on academic merit, without discrimination based on nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, political beliefs, or religious orientation. They must provide objective, impartial, constructive and timely evaluations. If they are assigned to review a paper where they identify the author(s) of the related paper, they must inform the editor(s) and cancel the review process. They must reveal any conflicts of interest which they may have, should respect the confidentiality of the review process, remaining anonymous in their reviews. They should express their ideas clearly with supporting arguments, identify any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published paper, or any relevant published work not cited by the author. They should report suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, or unethical research practices.
Based on the reviewers’ reports, manuscripts may be accepted without revisions, accepted with minor revisions, reconsidered after major revisions, or rejected.
Authors receive anonymous reviewer comments and are required to revise their manuscripts accordingly. Revised submissions may undergo an additional round of peer review.
The Editorial Board analyses the reviewers’ recommendations and proposes the manuscripts suitable for publication. The final decision regarding acceptance and publication belongs to the Scientific Council of the Academy.
The Editorial Board reserves the right to publish only manuscripts that meet the journal’s standards regarding scientific quality, originality, relevance, and ethical integrity.
The journal follows internationally recognized standards of publication ethics and malpractice prevention, including the principles promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
All participants in the publication process − authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff − are expected to comply with the journal’s ethical standards and maintain confidentiality, impartiality, and academic integrity throughout the editorial process.
The Scientific Bulletin of “Nicolae Bălcescu” Land Forces Academy applies a double-blind peer review process, ensuring that both reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the evaluation procedure.
Upon submission, all manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation to determine relevance to the journal’s scope, compliance with the author guidelines, originality and scientific quality, and adherence to ethical and editorial standards.
Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s technical or scientific requirements may be returned to the authors for revision before entering the peer review process.
Eligible manuscripts are sent for evaluation to at least two independent reviewers with recognized expertise in the relevant scientific field. One reviewer may be affiliated with the “Nicolae Bălcescu” Land Forces Academy, while the second reviewer is usually from another academic or research institution. In specific cases, a third reviewer may be appointed.
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts using the official Evaluation Form approved by the Scientific Council of the Academy.
The review process assesses relevance of the abstract, scientific argumentation, presentation of some analysis methods, accuracy of using the investigation instruments, novelty of the topic, the originality of solving the addressed problem, the topicality and the utility of the suggested solution, clarity of conclusions and further research directions, and relevance of bibliographic sources.
Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on academic merit, without discrimination based on nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, political beliefs, or religious orientation. They must provide objective, impartial, constructive and timely evaluations. If they are assigned to review a paper where they identify the author(s) of the related paper, they must inform the editor(s) and cancel the review process. They must reveal any conflicts of interest which they may have, should respect the confidentiality of the review process, remaining anonymous in their reviews. They should express their ideas clearly with supporting arguments, identify any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published paper, or any relevant published work not cited by the author. They should report suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, or unethical research practices.
Based on the reviewers’ reports, manuscripts may be accepted without revisions, accepted with minor revisions, reconsidered after major revisions, or rejected.
Authors receive anonymous reviewer comments and are required to revise their manuscripts accordingly. Revised submissions may undergo an additional round of peer review.
The Editorial Board analyses the reviewers’ recommendations and proposes the manuscripts suitable for publication. The final decision regarding acceptance and publication belongs to the Scientific Council of the Academy.
The Editorial Board reserves the right to publish only manuscripts that meet the journal’s standards regarding scientific quality, originality, relevance, and ethical integrity.
The journal follows internationally recognized standards of publication ethics and malpractice prevention, including the principles promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
All participants in the publication process − authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff − are expected to comply with the journal’s ethical standards and maintain confidentiality, impartiality, and academic integrity throughout the editorial process.
