University of Pécs

University of Pécs



Review process

Printer-friendly versionPDF változat

Review process



The conference operates a system of double-blind peer review. All submitted abstracts are assessed by at least two independent reviewers invited by the Scientific Programme Committee. The review process is confidential: reviewers do not know who the author(s) of the assessed abstracts are, the authors do not know the reviewers.

Authors of thematic/paper presentations and posters, as well as the Chairs of the symposia are informed of acceptance or rejection  of the abstracts along with the reasoned opinion of reviewers. However only the list of accepted papers, symposia and posters is made available publicly.

The review process is the same for papers, posters and symposia, however, the review criteria are different for theoretical and empirical papers (authors can name the category on submission), as well as for symposia summaries.


Theoretical papers

  1. Theoretical framework and embeddedness

  2. Critera for analysis, their relevance

  3. Originality – novel concepts or approaches

  4. General quality, structure, style

  5. Theoretical and practical significance


Empirical papers

  1. Theoretical embeddedness

  2. Aim, research questions, hypotheses, methods

  3. Presentation and interpretation of results

  4. General quality, structure, style

  5. Theoretical and practical significance


Symposium summary

  1. Aims

  2. Coherence

  3. General quality, structure, style

  4. Theoretical and practical significance


Proposals in each category are scored by the reviewers on a scale from 0 to 5, while brief written assessments are also provided. If the difference between the total scores of the two reviewers is 10 points or more, the Scientific Programme Committee invites a third reviewer in order to assess the paper in question.

Taking full account of the reviewers’ assessment, the final decision is made by the Scientific Programme Committee by considering the threshold for theoretical and empirical papers.


Possible decisions are as follows: (1) accepted; (2) rejected; (3) reclassified.


In case of rejection, there is no opportunity to improve and re-submit the proposal.

Reclassification means that the symposium presentation is offered to be included in the programme as a thematic/paper presentation, or a thematic/paper presentation as a poster. In case of reclassification, the author has the opportunity to decide ( whether they intend to present their paper in the suggested format. The authors concerned will be be informed about the proposed format and the deadline along with the review results.


Acceptance of the proposal does not automatically imply publication of the abstract in the conference proceedings. This only occurs if the registration fee is settled before the indicated deadline.

You shall not pass!