Editorial Board of the journal Studia Romanica et Anglica Zagrabiensia complies with and adheres to high ethical and scientific standards in publishing. The editor and the Editorial Board are obliged to mantain the integrity and confidentiality of the author’s work during the evaluation of the paper intended for publication. The Editor-in-chief is responsible for the work of the Editorial Board and maintaining the dynamics of the proper and timely execution of the peer-review process. When selecting reviewers, the Editorial Board takes care to avoid conflict of interest but also expects the reviewers to warn against such situations. The review process involves two or more reviews of the same paper. The papers are double-blind peer-review.
Responsibilities of authors
Accuracy
The author warrants that the article present an accurate account of the work performed is original, written by stated author(s), has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others. Authors should respect the journal’s open access policy and, in accordance with it, the rules of the public copyright license Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
Duplicate submission
By submitting this manuscript, the author(s) confirm that the submitted manuscript is not being considered for publication elsewhere.
Ethical conduct in research and plagiarism
By submitting this manuscript, the author(s) certify that the research for this study has been carried out in accordance with the ethical principles of research with respect to the research participants, and that professional standards were adhered to in its presentation. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Author(s) should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Undisclosed authorship and ghost authorship
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. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be named in an Acknowledgement section.
Responsibilities of reviewers
Assistance
Peer review should assist the editor in making editorial decisions and the author in improving the manuscript.
Timelines
Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the editor so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the editor.
Objectivity and fairness
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Any personal criticism of the author is inacceptable and will be lead toward the review to be discarded. Reviewers should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
Plagiarism awareness
Reviewers should check and identify if possible any form of plagiarism or academic misconduct in citing while reviewing a submitted manuscript. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge.
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 evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of theauthors, companies, or institutions connected to the submission.
Responsibilities of editors
The editor warrants that he/she will be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board as well as by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers when making publication decisions. The editor should maintain the integrity of the academic record, preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards, and always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.
Evaluation
The editor warrants to be fair in evaluating manuscripts for intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s). The editor will not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the author(s), reviewers and potential reviewers, and in some instances the editorial board members, as appropriate.
Confidentiality
The editor warrants to treat the manuscript confidentially. 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. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Conflict of interest
The editor warrants to disclose conflicts of interest. In case of conflictual interest editors should excuse themselves from handling the manuscript (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board to process the manuscript in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers). The editor should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.
Commercial and financial interests
The editor is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
Misconduct and malpractice
The editor warrants to conduct faire investigation in case of suspected misconduct on behalf of author, members of editorial board or reviewers.
The editor should guard the integrity of the published record by issuing corrections and retractions when needed and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct. The editor should pursue reviewer and editorial misconduct. The editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. The editor will be guided by COPE’s Guidelines for Retracting Articles when considering retracting, issuing expressions of concern about, and issuing corrections pertaining to articles that have been published in Studia Romanica et Anglica Zagrabiensia.