Peer Review
Papers should be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief, by e-mail, as attached document. The documents should be edited in Microsoft Word. Received papers are first analyzed by the chief editor, in order to see if the paper fits the topics of the journal. Out of topic papers will be returned to the authors.
After this preliminary step, papers that fit into journal’s topic are checked with antiplagiarism software.
The papers passing this verification are sent for evaluation to two independent scientific reviewers, experts in the article’s field. Reviewers identity is undisclosed to the authors. Reviewers give to the editor in chief their opinion on the scientific content of the paper and on the opportunity of publishing. Editor in chief will summarize reviewer’s observations and will communicate them to the corresponding author. If the reviewers have contrary opinions upon a paper, the editor in chief may submit the paper to a third referee. Taking into account the opinions of all reviewers, the editor in chief decides on the accepting/accepting with corrections/rejecting of the paper and communicates it to the corresponding author.
For the accepted papers, the authors should sent a written statement, that should emphasize that all data and results are real and original, and the paper has not been previously published or submitted for publishing elsewhere. By submitting the manuscript, the authors agree that the copyright for their article is transferred to the Publisher if and when the article is accepted for publication. The copyright covers the exclusive rights to reproduce and distribute the article including reprints, photographic reproductions, microform, electronic documents or any other reproductions of similar nature and translations.
Manuscripts that do not have attached the up mentioned written statement signed by authors will not be published.
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
• All submitted papersare checked with the antiplagiarism software and are subject to strict peer-review process by at least two reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper.
• The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
• The reviewers evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
• The staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
• Manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents and are reviewed by anonymous staff.
• A reviewer should also call to the publisher's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
• A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
• The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
• Submitting the same manuscript to more than one publication concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
