THE AUTHOR’S RESPONSIBILITY
Before submitting an article for publication, the author will become acquainted with the specifics, purpose and objectives of the journal, as well as with the editorial rules, according to the information provided on the journal's website. To be recognised as an author, the contributor must demonstrate the originality, uniqueness or innovative quality of the work intended for publication The author must mention the intervention and contribution of other collaborators in the writing of the material and appropriately cite passages taken from published materials or statements belonging to other persons/researchers. The author must also specify whether the research was funded by institutions, organizations etc. The author must respond to requests from the editorial team regarding revisions, deadlines or any other additional recommendations. If several authors sign an article, one of them will become the contact person throughout the evaluation and verification process for publication; this person will have to inform and involve the other authors in the process of revising the text, at the same time signalling to the editors any error that may occur in the publication process.
THE REVIEWER’S RESPONSIBILITY
The role of the reviewer is to assist the editorial team in the process of evaluating the articles and in making decisions regarding the originality, uniqueness and quality of the results proposed by the author for publication. The reviewer is invited to objectively analyse the text and provide the author with civilized, respectful and constructive feedback, regardless of whether the material is accepted or rejected so that the author can correct his/her deficiencies, gain experience and improve his/her research, analysis and interpretation. The reviewer will respond to the invitation to examine the article within the deadline set by the editorial team, and the review and revision proposals will meet the deadline after obtaining a favourable response. In the event of a conflict of interest, if the text is beyond the reviewer’s expertise or if the reviewer is unable to evaluate it within the time limits, the reviewer may decline the invitation. According to the rules listed on the journal’s website, the review process involves double-checking, with a manuscript being sent to at least two reviewers. The identity of the reviewer will remain anonymous, and the information and ideas obtained from the review of the manuscripts will not be used for the personal benefit of the reviewer.
THE EDITOR'S RESPONSIBILITY
The main responsibilities of the editor include the journal’s general direction and editorial content. Hence, the editor should ensure the journal’s neutral and objective nature and evaluate the content of articles submitted for publication regardless of the authorship’s race, religion, ethnicity, age, sex, sexual orientation or political affiliation. The editor is free to organize thematically each issue of the journal and to assign to the reviewers the texts to be evaluated taking into account the reviewers’ academic recognition and expertise in the field. The editor will follow the general guidelines regarding the editing rules and submission deadlines (listed on the journal's website). Manuscripts and their authors will be treated as confidential and will not be transmitted without the editor’s consent to anyone except the editorial team, reviewers or potential reviewers. Unpublished materials and the information they contain will not be used by the editor for his/her purpose without the express consent of the author. The publication decision will observe the reviewers’ points of view and observations, the policy of the editorial board and the legislation, taking into account the legal obligations regarding defamation, copyright and plagiarism.
PEER REVIEWING PROCESS
Manuscripts are assigned to the Executive Editor. The papers before being sent for reviewing are first checked by anti-plagiarism software. Executive Editor sends the received articles, without the name and affiliation of authors, to 2 experts in the field, generally by e-mail. All the reviewers of a paper remain anonymous to the authors and act independently. They have different affiliations, usually located in different towns/countries, and they are unaware of each other’s identities. If the two reviewers’ decisions are not the same, the paper is sent to a third reviewer.
The reviewers’ evaluations and Executive Editor’s comments enable the Editor-in-Chief to make a decision. This decision, along with the comments, is transmitted to the authors via e-mail. A decision is made usually within ten weeks of the receipt of the manuscript. The Editor-in-Chief will advise authors whether a manuscript is accepted, should be revised, or is rejected. Minor revisions should be returned within four weeks of decision; significant modifications should be made within three months. Manuscripts not fixed within this time will be withdrawn from consideration unless there are extenuating circumstances.
The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision for publication based on the scrutiny of reviewers and the Journal’s scope.
The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the quality and selection of manuscripts chosen to be published, and the authors are always responsible for each article’s content.
Department of Human, Social and Political Sciences, 2006-2021