1. Review Process
   All reviews in EBR use a double-blind review process. Reviewers are expected to provide comments and recommendations in an unbiased and constructive manner, with respect for the author and with the aim to improve the quality of the manuscript. Each reviewer receives a formal recognition by the journal. The editor has the final authority for the acceptance/rejection of an article.
   
   
2. Reviewers
   Authors may submit the names, addresses and/or e-mail addresses of up to three potential reviewers with the manuscript. The editor has the authority to decide whether or not to include the suggested reviewers.
   
   
3. Concurrent reviews
   An article that is concurrently reviewed at another journal could not be in a review process at EBR.
   
   
4. Resubmissions
   Manuscripts that have been rejected are not eligible for further consideration by the EBR journal. If a resubmission is allowed, it is explicitly stated as such in the editor's decision.
   
   
5. Submissions
   Authors should define incremental contribution of the paper by referencing relevant work on which the paper is based. Submitting a paper that is substantially the same as a previously published paper is considered a serious breach of professional ethics and may result in editor informing officials at the authors' institutions of this breach. Papers that are improved versions of working papers or published in conference proceedings are also considered for review.
   
   
6. Conflicts of Interest
   The author and reviewer are required to inform the editor of conflict of interest. Authors can specify up to two names of potential reviewers that should not be involved in the review process of their paper.
   
   
7. Access policies
   EBR provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. Articles available freely online are more often cited and have greater impact than those not freely available. Immediately after publication, authors may post paper on the author's personal or institutional archival Web site.

In the process of publishing a peer-reviewed article standards of ethical behavior are respected by authors, editors, and reviewers.

All authors of research papers submitted to the journal should make a substantial contribution in the process of paper development. Authors should respect intellectual property rights when citing sources (consult author guidelines). Authors should defer to specific ethical standards when their research includes people and/or animals.

Editors are responsible for managing a timely review process, confidentiality, fair communication with authors and disclosure of potential conflict of interest.

Reviewers are responsible for providing a timely and an unbiased review of the paper. If reviewer has have specific, paper-related concerns, s(he) should discuss them with the editor only. Reviewers are also obliged to disclose any potential conflict of interest. Reviewers should keep the information about the review confidential and should not use any information from the paper before it appears in print.