Editorial Policies
Ethics of the editorial process
SDQ welcome original manuscripts that have not been previously published in any language. The paper should not be subject to any prior agreement or encumbrance and should not be considered for publication elsewhere. The manuscript should not contain any defamatory or confidential material and should not infringe any proprietary rights or state secret. It should not violate the right of privacy or publicity of any third party or otherwise violate any other applicable law. All authors of the paper are responsible for the content; the corresponding author should be given the authority to act on the behalf of all authors in all matters pertaining to publication.

To verify originality and ethical conduct, all manuscripts are routinely checked by the plagiarism detection software SimilarityCheck.

The authors retain the right to make the manuscripts available in open access repositories provided that complete information about the original publishing references is provided.

Submissions to SDQ proceeds totally online at here

The system converts uploaded files to a single PDF file, which is used in the peer-review process.

Upon acceptance of the manuscript, the author will be requested to transfer copyright of the paper to the War Studies University, Warsaw. This transfer ensures electronic storage, printing and dissemination of the journal to the widest possible readership.

Copyright of open access articles is defined by the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

The Editors reserve the right to make necessary corrections to the manuscript without consulting the author, including editorial changes and stylistic errors.

Authorship is limited to those who have made a substantial contribution to the manuscript. Those who fail to meet this criterion should be acknowledged. Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the acknowledgements agrees to being so named.

Role of the funding source
The authors should acknowledge the funding source(s) of the research.

Peer Review process
Upon online submission, the uploaded files are converted to a single PDF file, which is used in the peer-review process. The editors retain a right to reject the submission without review if it fails to meet the following criteria:
  • It is beyond the scope of the journal (for aims and scope see link)
  • It does not offer substantial new knowledge nor added value
  • It fails to meet the editorial guidelines (for instructions for author see link, template)
  • It is written in poor English
  • It contains serious mistakes or faults
  • It contains poor bibliography

The authors are welcome to submit the names and e-mail addresses of potential reviewers. However, the Editors retain the sole right to decide who reviews the manuscript. Reviewers are appointed based on their expertise in the appropriate field. All manuscripts are refereed by two reviewers in a double-blind review process, which ensures an objective and impartial evaluation of scientific merit of the paper. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript taking into consideration:
  • Novelty and originality of the work;
  • Significance to the field;
  • Rigorous methodology;
  • Study design and clarity:
    • Is the title of the paper relevant to its content?
    • Is the problem well defined in the introduction?
    • Has the author well defined the aim of the paper, research questions and hypothesis?
    • Do the results presented in the paper solve the problem and develop the hypothesis stated in the introduction towards a well-developed research hypothesis?
    • Do the results of the research imply the use of methods whose range and sensitivity resolves the research problem and validate the hypothesis?
    • Does the content of the paper contain sufficient arguments to reach conclusions?
    • Is the language correct?
    • Do the charts, figures, models, calculations etc. support verbal arguments?
    • Is bibliography accurate and sufficient?
  • Quality of content;
  • The scale of proposed solutions;
  • Predicted interest in the paper;
  • Purpose of publishing the paper.

If a manuscript does not meet the standards of the journal or has other major deficiencies, the reviewers will express constructive criticism to help the authors improve their paper. If a manuscript is acceptable for publication but needs to be improved, the authors can submit the revised paper. However, they should address all of the reviewers’ suggestions; if the author disagrees with the reviewers’ comments, they should provide a point-by-point rebuttal to every comment.

Revised manuscript submission
The authors will be informed of the reviewers’ decision to either accept (with or without revision) or reject the manuscript. When the manuscript is requested to be revised, the authors should do so as soon as possible.

The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief.

The Editors reserve the right to make necessary corrections to the manuscript without consulting the author, including editorial changes and stylistic errors.

The manuscript may not be changed once it is published.

Scientific misconduct
Scientific misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, ghostwriting, guest authorship and other forms of violation of generally accepted research practices. If scientific misconduct is suspected, the Editors can reject or retract the manuscript, alert editors of other journals or inform the author’s funding institution or other authority for investigation. Security and Defence Quarterly have adopted the COPE guidelines on publication ethics - Core practices.

Open access
SDQ is a peer reviewed, open access journal. All articles are free for everyone to read, download, copy, and distribute under the licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

SDQ does not charge authors an open access publication fee.