Submitted articles will first be evaluated by the Editorial Board for their relevance to the profile of the journal. This is followed by a double anonymous peer review process, in which two peer reviewers receive the manuscript without the author's name and may recommend acceptance, revision or rejection. All reviewers of the journal hold an academic degree. The main criteria in the evaluation process are originality, quality (both in terms of content and form) and relevance to the diverse areas of Translation and Interpreting Studies.

Submitted manuscripts that do not meet these criteria will not be accepted by the Editorial Board, which will immediately notify the author(s) of its decision. If the manuscript meets the criteria, the Editorial Board will invite two reviewers. The review is anonymous in both directions: authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other. The referees are researchers with expertise relevant to the manuscript, selected from the Editorial Board and from research and higher education institutions in Hungary and beyond. If the manuscript is interdisciplinary in nature, experts from different disciplinary fields may be involved in the peer review process.

Reviewers must inform the Editorial Board of any potential conflict of interest. The review should be objective, well argued, accompanied by suggestions and conclude with a statement on the suitability of the manuscript for publication (manuscript recommended for publication without changes; manuscript recommended for publication after revision; manuscript not recommended for publication).

If the manuscript is supported for publication by both reviewers and the Editorial Board agrees, the manuscript is accepted for publication. The author(s) will be informed by the responsible editor by e-mail, enclosing the reviewers' comments. After revision, the responsible editor will check the final version for suitability for publication. The Editorial Board reserves the right to reject the manuscript even if both reviewers support the publication of the article; in such a case, the author(s) will be informed in detail of the reasons for the rejection.

If both reviewers do not support publication of the manuscript, the Editorial Board will forward the reviewers' comments to the author(s), together with the reasons for the rejection. In the case of two conflicting opinions, the Editorial Board will invite a third independent reviewer to review the manuscript; the final decision will be made by the Editor-in-Chief.

The average turnaround time of the review process is 3-6 months.