ANNALS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CRAIOVA FOR JOURNALISM, COMMUNICATION AND MANAGEMENT
Publication rules and guidelines
The articles published in Annals of the University of Craiova for Journalism, Communication and Management (AUCJCM) are using English in order to maintain multiculturalism and interdisciplinarity. The manuscript should include the title, author information including institutional affiliation where applicable and a 150-250 words long abstract. The full manuscript should be no more than 5.000 words. Submitted papers will be checked by the editors before beginning the Peer Review Process. For citations and references please use only the APA rules. If needed, you can download an excerpt from the 6th edition of the APA Manual here. The document format in which the articles must be sent is Microsoft Word. There is no publication fee for authors. All articles are published under the CC BY-NC-SA license. The copyright belongs to the authors, which retain publishing rights.
Peer review process
AUCJCM follows a double blinded peer-review process, all articles that fit the standard of quality and in line with the scope of our journal are sent to two members of the advisory board for the review process after anonymization, hereby ensuring that both the reviewer and the author are always hidden from both parties. The editors of our journal will provide the authors of the submitted articles with feedback, received from the referees, in order for the author to revise their article and resubmit it for consideration. Manuscripts failing to meet acceptable standards of English usage, with incomplete or outdated bibliographies, or the content of which is technically weak or inappropriate for the scope of the journal will generally be rejected on submission. Accepted manuscripts are also checked for plagiarism before publication using software accepted by the Romanian Ministry of Education.
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Annals of the University of Craiova for Journalism, Communication and Management adheres to the publication ethics for editors, authors and reviewers as defined by COPE – Committee on Publication Ethics, in their Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (Committee on Publication Ethics, 2011) and Elseviers’ Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK) as a baseline for handling handling publishing ethics issues.
- Publication decisions
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted to the journal will be published. The editor will evaluate manuscripts without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The decision will be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the journal’s scope. Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism should also be considered.
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
- Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author’s explicit written consent.
- Contribution to editorial decisions
The peer-reviewing process assists the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the paper.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be disclosed to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
- Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
- Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify cases in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been cited in the reference section. They should point out whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source. Reviewers will notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
- Disclosure and conflict of interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.
- Reporting standards
Authors of original research reports should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. 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.
- Data access and retention
Authors could be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the paper for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least ten years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.
- Originality, plagiarism and acknowledgement of sources
Authors will submit only entirely original works, and will appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work should also be cited.
- Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
In general, papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Manuscripts which have been published as copyrighted material elsewhere cannot be submitted. In addition, manuscripts under review by the journal should not be submitted to SSERR. However, by submitting a manuscript, the author(s) retain the rights to the published material. as evidenced by our Open Access Policy.
- Authorship of the paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author ensures that all contributing co-authors and no uninvolved persons are included in the author list. The corresponding author will also verify that all co-authors have approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
- Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors should include a statement disclosing any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
- Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and to cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper in form of an erratum.