The editors at Financial Internet Quarterly only accept manuscripts in English. Articles should not exceed 8,000 words, including tables, figure captions, and references. Articles should be prepared using the format supplied (Sample_paper). We also require that citations and bibliographies are done according to the standards defined by the American Psychological Association (download citation style). Articles submitted without adhering to these rules will be returned for correction.

With regard to the nature of the double-blind peer review process, manuscripts should be submitted in one version, with all identifying data removed.

The abstract should include: an indication of the topic of the article; the research questions discussed in the article; methods and tools used to answer the research questions; results of the analyses; conclusions as to the obtained results and for whom they are or may be important.

All charts used in manuscripts should be submitted in separate files (save as PNG or JPG), in editable form.

This Journal does not charge Article Processing Charges (APC). Authors who are planning to submit a manuscript are asked to register an account which is part of the electronic system of recruitment and reviewing articles.

All manuscripts initially accepted by the section editor are double-blind peer review retaining the anonymity of the author and reviewer.

The author bears sole responsibility for the views presented in a manuscript.

Authors must provide full disclosure of all sources of research funding and any institutional support or contributions relevant to the submitted work. This information should be clearly stated in the Acknowledgments section.

For collective manuscripts, authors are additionally required to provide detailed information regarding the individual contributions of each listed author at the time of submission. This requirement is intended to prevent practices such as 'ghostwriting' and 'guest authorship.' 

Publishing Process

1. Initial submission check. The article is submitted to the editorial office and reviewed by the secretary to en-sure that it meets the formal requirements. This stage may result in a desk reject or in the article being forward-ed for further processing.
2. Assignment of handling editor. If the article meets the formal criteria, the Editor-in-Chief assigns a handling editor from among the section editors, who are responsible for specific thematic areas of the journal. The Editor-in-Chief or Deputy Editor-in-Chief may also act as the handling editor.
3. Preliminary evaluation by the handling editor. The assigned editor oversees the article throughout the entire publishing process. After reviewing the article, the editor may (but is not required to) seek an additional opinion from an expert or statistician if believe the article requires an in-depth methodological or computational evaluation.
4. Selection of reviewers. If the article successfully passes the initial evaluation (or does not require statistical review), the handling editor sends it for peer review, selecting two reviewers, with no more than one based in Po-land. Engaging a reviewer from Poland is optional and depends on the article's subject matter.
5. Double-blind peer review. All reviews are conducted under a double-blind process, meaning both authors and reviewers remain anonymous. Reviewers have three weeks to prepare their reviews. During this time, they may consult a statistical editor for additional input.
6. Third review in case of discrepancies. In cases of significant discrepancies between the two reviews, the han-dling editor may seek the opinion of a third reviewer, which extends the process by another three weeks.
7. Author revisions. After the review stage, the article is sent to the authors. They have up to three weeks to re-spond and submit revisions. This deadline may be extended upon the authors’ request. Authors must submit: a clean version of the revised article, a marked version showing all changes (e.g., track changes or highlighted text), and a detailed response addressing each reviewer’s comment.
8. Evaluation of revisions by reviewers. The revised article is then returned to the reviewers for evaluation of the changes. They have three weeks for this step. In justified cases, another round of revisions may be required. If the revisions are not satisfactory, the article may be rejected.
9. Language editing. Once the revisions are accepted, the article is sent for language editing.
10. Final layout and publication. After language editing, the article proceeds to typesetting. The finalized article is published on the journal’s website at the end of each quarter.